Research Plan

Bubbles in the Ocean of Information -

Radical Futures of the News Media in the USA in

2023

FUTUS6 - Futures Research Methods in Practice

Turku School of Economics

November 2013

Oluwarotimi Falona

Sreeganthan Priya

Vrlík Filip

2

Table of Contents:

1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 3

1.1. Background .................................................................................................................................... 3

1.2 Research questions: ....................................................................................................................... 5

1.3 Why the Media of the USA? ........................................................................................................... 5

2. ACTVOD Table ................................................................................................................................... 7

2.1 Explanations for Trends of the ACTVOD Table: ............................................................................. 8

3. Research Methods .......................................................................................................................... 11

3.1 Research Methods Table: ............................................................................................................. 12

4. Research Plan ................................................................................................................................. 20

4.1 Collecting Data ............................................................................................................................. 20

4.2 Analysing Data: ............................................................................................................................. 22

4.3Attracting Participants .................................................................................................................. 22

5. Findings and Conclusion ................................................................................................................. 23

5.1. Critical Examination of the Research Plan .................................................................................. 24

5.2 Further Research .......................................................................................................................... 25

6. References ......................................................................................................................................... 27

3

1. Introduction

The research topic of this paper is based on the possible, preferred and probable future of the

media of the USA and more precisely The Radical Future of the Media in the USA in 2023. In our

research, based on our findings, we will evaluate the one possible, preferred and probable future of

the American news media ten years from now. Despite having taken into account the fact that

possible futures are always multiple, in this paper, instead of many futures, we will examine the

scenario of and the attitudes towards one particular future which we presume could realize the USA

in the next decade. This scenario has been chosen according to the current situation of the American

media as well as the trends and signals that point towards this specific future that we expect to see,

and in this paper it is called Bubbles in the Ocean of Information.

As our geographical focus we have chosen the USA because the media of America to us is one

that remains rather ambiguous: on one hand it is the information platform of a supposedly

transparent democracy but on the other hand it is debated to be one of the most politicized and

controlled medias in the world (Lutz, 2012). It is also found that media, especially news media,

credibility in America is historically low (Newman, 2013). Today 60% of Americans have no trust or

very little trust in the mass media, and newspapers and television earn the trust of merely one fourth

of the US population (Newman, 2013). This has started the growth of interest towards other, new

sources of news media, mainly those online, and we now want to ascertain how bright the future of

the US media actually looks like.

1.1. Background

The subject of this research paper Bubbles in the Ocean of Information refers firstly to the

ocean as the abundant amount of information in America, provided by the media or mainly the

Internet, that people today have access to, and secondly to the bubbles as the somewhat closed,

selective minds and perceptions people have towards the information which they receive as well as

the tendency of them searching only the information they identify themselves with. Hence the

4

research focus of this study will be based around two main features of how the Internet and its usage

are evolving in the USA in the next ten years to come:

Abundance of information on the Internet

Users subscribing only to the news channels (web pages) they agree with

The first feature, Abundance of information on the Internet, takes into consideration the

obviously high amount of information online and the easy access to it, but also considers the

increasingly blended authority and diluted authorship of all the available knowledge. The implication

of the information abundance is the ease to find great amounts of information on virtually any topic

on one hand, but having difficulty recognizing the information’s credibility on the other. For instance

in the past newspapers, radio and the TV were enjoying quite a high level of trust from its audience -

the society - who trusted that the reported information was the "truth". However, nowadays there is

no clear consensus about what information source actually has adequate credibility and as

mentioned, conventional news media (TV, radio, newspapers) have largely lost their trust in the USA

(Newman, 2013). Also the increased propagation of information online in the Internet era has made

it more difficult to approach information critically, or more precisely it has made it easier to get

information that is not coming from a credible source and approach it uncritically. This means that

the nature of information literacy has changed. In the past information literacy would have meant

simply knowing how to read, whereas today one needs to be skilled in searching for information and

critically consider and absorb its context. Besides the entertainment part of it, the media continues

to inform and educate those who seek knowledge. As the access to internet and other news media is

increasing globally, information is now produced for the masses, and just as well by the masses. All

these factors form the new landscape of information exchange with abundance being a distinct

feature.

The second feature of the Internet, Users subscribing only to the news channels (web pages)

of their preference, refers to the fact that people often seek news and information which is

connected mainly to their personal interests. The present practice differs from the past in several

5

ways. Most importantly, it is now possible to read news not only as part of a news collection but also

as individual news stories. For example, in the earlier days a person would buy a printed newspaper

that contained many articles on a number of pages and on a variety of topics, whereas nowadays the

trend on the Internet is to receive (by subscribing) and search for links that lead to one article or

topic only and it is thus easier to ignore all the other news articles which the person does not hence

actually see. Of course, a sports fan might also read a newspaper by skipping all the other sections

and read only the football scores, but he or she would still be aware of this “skipping” of the other

news sections. By subscribing to themed news feeds online or specific printed journals the user is

assembling his own collection of news stories, possibly in a very limited manner and with bias

towards specific other alternative worldviews or viewpoints. As a result, one does not need to face

uninteresting news or interpretations which one does not agree with. This might arguably lead to

increasing ignorance of what is happening or being thought about outside our own so called “circle of

interest”. This circle can be seen as a bubble in which a person can trap him or herself.

1.2 Research questions:

This research aims at observing the possible, preferable and probable future of the American media

in 2023 by answering the following research questions:

Is a future, in which information is overabundant and people are highly selective of information

sources, possible? Is this future probable? Is this future preferable?

1.3 Why the Media of the USA?

Diversified media technologies known as mass media, use mass communication as a medium

for reaching a targeted group of audience. It can come in various broadcast media technologies such

as radio, recorded music, films and television. Other forms include print media, outdoor media and

digital media (Internet and mobile communication). Over the years, the world mass media evolution

has overwhelmingly transformed the way we see our world today. From the first development of the

newspaper from 1612 till 1620s in London, to the post-2nd world war right after when radio, TV and

6

videos were introduced into media, mass media has taken on different forms and transformations,

with the new modern day “information age” where media encompasses also the Internet, mobile

phones, blogs, podcasts and news feeds. Despite its seemingly impressive growth curve, vast

amounts of speculations on the influence, sociological impacts and credibility of mass media on the

modern society have been occurring recently (Shah, 2012).

According to studies mass media in America is dominated by six major US companies namely;

Time Warner, VIACOM, Vivendi Universal, Walt Disney and News Corp and General Electric, which

together own 90% of all media in America (Lutz, 2012). These forms of media include: theme parks,

movie studios, television and radio broadcast networks and programing, video news, sports

entertainment, telecommunications, wireless phones, video games software, electronic media and

music companies. It can be argued that these companies have merged to form an elite which has the

power to shape the opinions and beliefs of people through basically all forms of media. The

perception of what is acceptable and understood by society today is to a large extent dictated by the

media as it plays a significant role in shaping public perceptions on a variety of important issues.

Opinion shaping is being done in a polarized way though, especially in connections to the two

dominating political currents. According to a non-governmental research organization Freedom

House, media coverage of political affairs in USA is aggressive and increasingly partisan. The press

itself is frequently a source of contention, with conservatives and liberals alike accusing the media of

bias. The appearance of enhanced polarization is driven to some degree by the growing influence of

all-news cable television channels and blogs, many of which are aggressively partisan. The popularity

of talk-radio shows, whose hosts are primarily conservative, has also played an important role in

media polarization. Nonetheless, most U.S. newspapers make a serious effort to keep a wall of

separation between news reporting, commentary, and editorials. The trend toward fewer family-

owned newspapers and more newspapers under corporate control has contributed to a less partisan,

if blander, editorial tone (Freedom House 2013).

7

All said, despite its vulnerable level of credibility, the American mass media can be said to be

playing a large role in shaping the new age modern culture, both in America as well as on a global

scale by interpreting, selecting and portraying a particular set of beliefs, values, and traditions as

reality - as an entire way of life. Because of its significance as well as its national and global influence

it is valuable to make a futures research on the potential state of the United States’ media in 2023.

2. ACTVOD Table

The ACTVOD analysis below is a result of the brainstorming carried out for this research paper

on the relevant actors, clients, transformations, values, obstacles and drivers of the research topic

and questions of this paper.

ACTVOD

ACTORS Private news media companies

Not-for-profit media companies

Internet companies

Users Government and the state

CLIENTS Individual users / people

Companies & organizations

Educational institutions

Governmental organizations and institutes

TRANSFORMATION

Increased transparency increased critical acceptance of audience

Increased “bubble effect” people less self-critical

Increased societal awareness of hidden knowledge

Reluctance to change(s)

VALUES Freedom of access to information

Freedom of speech

Respect More informed populace

A need to know

OBSTACLES Abundance of information

Selectivity Legal protection against blasphemy

High investment on information security

DRIVERS Politicization of media

Access to Internet

Growth of content (abundance)

More intercultural exposure

8

2.1 Explanations of Variables in the ACTVOD Table:

ACTORS: Entities that are part of news media circulation and/or yield a significant influence

over them.

Private news media companies: Profit-driven companies that participate in mass media production.

Specific media outlets include television, radio, newspapers, magazines, web-based news portals,

blogs and number of forms of using Internet for creating and distributing news information.

Not-for-profit media companies: Not-for-profit media companies that participate in mass media

production.

Internet companies: Private companies whose business is established around Internet services such

as Internet providers, search engines, Internet advertisement sellers, Internet communication

providers, social media, server and data hosting, etc.

Users: All persons (natural or legal) who exchange information with news media companies. Most

often as consumers of news, but lately also as producers of news

Government and the state: Regulators of the environment. Possessing legislative and executive

power they define the operational framework for media deciding how much freedom and

independence is left to them. Besides this, the government is often an object of news media

coverage as political affairs are a significant news segment.

CLIENTS: The users of the Internet media in the USA.

Individual users / people - viewed as any individuals who use the media privately and for private

purposes, unconnected to any corporation, institute or other organization or society. As clients of the

news producers, users influence the media content and mode of transmission considerably, given

that the media business is competitive and driven by demand.

Companies / organizations - private organizations which make use of or provide for the media and

the news on the internet

9

Educational institutions - schools, universities, research centers and other profit or non-profit

education-driven organizations

Governmental organizations and institutes - Politicians are highly interested in how the media

writes about them (public image). Nonetheless, the government and its institutes have their own

intelligence services to stay informed.

TRANSFORMATION: Drivers for a change.

Increased transparency, increased critical acceptance of audience: A trend following explicit low

trust towards news media resulting in readers being more aware of news media bias and

subsequently news media companies having to be more open about their ownership structure,

funding, and publications

Increased bubble effect, people more narrow-minded: A trend of certain news media enjoying loyal

readers and a rather high level of trust from its audience, which results in readers being content with

the publisher they trust and identify with while ignoring other sources with conflicting information or

different worldview.

Increased societal awareness of ignored knowledge: “Bursting the bubble” in a sense of becoming

aware of alternative information sources allowing for a new understanding happening en mass.

Reluctance to change(s): A counter-trend to transformation when the actors prefer status quo

VALUES: Possible effects and after-effects or results and implications of radical futures of the

US media.

Freedom of access to information: Information is less protected and guarded than before.People are

able to get information about virtually anything and everything. At the same time though, the

awareness of information abundance grows and so does the critical approach towards it.

Freedom of speech: A right to express one’s own opinions and beliefs. This can be exercised by news

publishers or individual writers.

10

Respect: Producing information on the basis that otherness (gender, race, belief, etc.) and its

integrity is equally valuable.

More informed populace: People become more aware and conscious about the difference between

real and true information and information which is not reliable, realistic or based on facts.

A need to know: Peoples' need to have an understanding for occurrences and events in their

environment. Also connected with the need to engage in social discussion about phenomena using a

common language

OBSTACLES: All possible hindrances of accessing information.

Abundance of information: Refers to the overwhelming high amount of information online and the

easy access to it. This means that all the information out there is not reliable or truthful and can be

based on individual views or opinions. This increases the need for a more critical view towards the

media.

Selectivity: Refers to people selecting only the information which is in their area of interest and

hence ignoring the rest of the information which is available.

Legal Protection against blasphemy: Prevention of a religion, holy persons or things considered

sacred being insulted by legal means. High investment on Information Security: The importance of

protecting both private and shared information (intellectual property right, hackers, viruses) which is

available for, and can be added by, virtually every individual or organization.

DRIVERS: Are agents of change which instigate the radical futures of the US media.

Politicization of media: Different organizations/individuals using information channels under their

influence for achieving personal or political objectives.

Access to Internet: Connectivity availability.

Growth of content (abundance): The growth of the amount of available information on multiple

topics possible.

11

More intercultural exposure: The more people become aware of what has been constrained (hidden)

from them on cultural grounds, the more they become curious to know about it, hence becoming

interculturally more oriented.

3. Research Methods

This research will be carried out by using the methodology of collective intelligence, more

precisely crowdsourcing. In order to explore the one possible future of the US media, we will use free

futures images and notions and see how the proposed future might be perceived by people

themselves as users of the Internet media. The research does not aim at collecting solid facts or

presumptions of media experts by interviewing them. As we see that the users or people, as

customers are and will be the drivers of change of the media, we have chosen to use them as the

primary source of information in our study.

In the first phase of the research multiple Internet platforms, which might be suitable for the

purpose of conducting this research, are reviewed. From six platforms, the most suitable social media

platform is f is chosen. After that we will discuss the research methods which will be used and how

the research process will be organized.

In the second phase of the study the chosen platform will be utilized to carry out both a

quantitative as well as a qualitative crowdsourcing study where the main group of Internet media

users is used as a target group. After this the results will be analyzed to review the possibility,

preferability and probability of the suggested future of the US media in 2023: Bubbles in the Ocean of

Information.

12

3.1 Research Methods Table:

This chapter provides an overview of a few potentially suitable collective intelligence

platforms that this research could utilize. Platforms considered are: Real Time Delphi, Facebook,

Twitter, Foresight Engine, Prediction Market Software and Agora. All these platforms will be

reviewed from different perspectives in the below table as well as in the below discussions in order

to find the most suitable one for this research.

Name of Platform

Uses experts? Is qualitative / quantitative?

Anonymity? Uses iteration? Consensus? Facilitator? Information structuring?

Millenium Project: Real Time Delphi

Yes - involves Respondents, which are majorly experts

Its involves more of qualitative than quantitative data

Yes - User's/Respondents profiles are normally hidden from each other providing room for anonymity

No- A core methodological innovation of its studies are the absence of Iterated rounds

Not necessary - But the process tends to guide the group’s responses toward reaching consensus

Yes - but after the first round, facilitators interventions are reduced or become less proactive

Yes - Questions are asked and Experts responses are structured to follow the questionnaire sequence

Facebook, social platform

No. Facebook is open to all users.

Mainly quantitative but also can be used for retrieving qualitative data

Normally no - users register to the system with their own name. Some of course register with a name that is made up but normally people are “real”

No. But for research purposes iteration can be conducted by utilizing the discussions and comments of people

No consensus is being seeked in Facebook. People share ideas and information which then

Yes. Normally facilitators are used for monitoring data entry and ensuring no online violations are committed. In research a facilitator may be used to keep track of discussions

No structuring. Users are free to post and share almost anything openly.

Twitter General populace - including interested experts

Mainly quantitative - quite often, results are compared on how much responses it gets

No/yes- Open identity… Through users profile, participants identities can be retrieved. But alias can also be used as IDs

Barely used - but can occur in tweet trends through hash-tags...

No - Most results are opinion based, which comes in form of suggestions and ideas.

Yes - Tweet administrator have control over which responses are visible or are not, with a sense of info. control

Not really - But information can follow certain structural paths through tends from tweets - responses can be restricted to some certain people

Foresight Engine

No. Qualitative Yes, virtual identity No. Iteration is not included in the process, possible though

No. Yes, partially - game masters trying to “clean up” the threads

Yes, partially. Response to a post has to be one of four types - card types.

Prediction market software

Population in general - also experts can be used

Mainly quantitative. Qualitative qualities can also be utilized.

Normally people use nicknames or anonymously..

Yes often used to reach some result. Not necessary though.

Yes. A clear trend in the market is seeked and/or predicted

Normally the conductor of the market analysis will facilitate the application

Very important! The collected information helps to predict the market.

Agora argument mapper

Anybody. Both. Follows logical value of an argument, being of qualitative or quantitative nature.

Partially. Virtual identity, often real name and academic profile is used.

Limited iteration. Only the given argument is repeatedly reviewed.

Yes, logic should lead towards one end

No. System’s rules are not explicit. Users are given interface and a manual and should self-organize themselves

Yes. Absolutely.

The Real-Time Delphi (RTD) is an advanced method of the Delphi method which is a

communications or research technique relying on expert information (Kuusi, 2013). The RTD method

is relatively new and efficient for collecting and synthesizing expert opinions. It also involves a

consultative process that uses computer technology to increase efficiency of the Delphi process.

Unlike traditional Delphi, in RTD the responses are shared immediately, so there is no delay waiting

for a next round and the answers can be updated instantly. The respondents participate by filling out

an online questionnaire as well as the results, both numerical and qualitative. Respondents are

encouraged to revisit the questionnaire as many times as possible.

The usefulness of RTD in research cannot be overemphasized. The area where it is mainly

found useful is collection of knowledge-based qualitative ideas and suggestions from experts from a

given field. Their answers can be continuously reviewed and updated in reactions to feedback. A

potential qualitative result can be envisaged imminently through the adoption of this platform for

futures research. Useful features of the RTD are the maximization of validity of results through its

procedures, the possibility of calculating in real-time enhanced visualization of results, and the

enhancement of quantitative assessment (a possible previously conducted quantitative study for

which inertia is seeked) leading to qualitative judgments of participants shown in real-time and

serving as a justification for their numerical assessment of the question. The RTD has already been

adopted in some futures research works but according to the article by Gordon and Pease (2006, 12),

in terms of setbacks, its greatest weakness is that it misses a wholly integrated, scientifically founded

concept in its approach, and it is also a relatively new concept which requires further research and

application to become a tool for full scale operations. Another concern is that it uses only experts

opinions in a qualitative manner which makes it an inappropriate tool for a quantitative research

which we want to use in our research.

Facebook is the world’s largest social networking service functioning online. It was founded in

2004 and in less than a decade has gathered over one billion users (Bloomberg Businessweek, 2013).

Out of these 100 million are in America which is 67% of all the internet users in the US (Smith, 2013).

As an American social networking platform Facebook has become very international, functioning in

about 200 countries. Its user base consists of primarily young, below middle-aged users who use their

15

own, real name as their profile ID and share photos and information about themselves, their

interests, events and basically anything they want. 83% of American Internet users between the age

of 18-29 are on Facebook, and since the young are the ones to determine the future in general,

Facebook is an absolutely appropriate platform to seek trends and paths to identifying future of the

media in the US.

Facebook is also a prime example of a social media network today which is booming and has

become a key means of media all over the world. Due to its international extent and its extremely

wide user base, Facebook is a suitable tool for quantitative and qualitative research which requires

diverse realistic viewpoints, opinions, experiences and ideas through effective crowdsourcing.

Facebook users are commonly not anonymous and are in fact willing to share their ideas and

opinions, and are active in sharing posts or links related to many of their interests. Accessing

Facebook has also been made very easy and convenient as users can access the software through the

website itself or via a mobile device application.

In our research we also do not particularly require the knowledge or feedback of experts but

rather of the users of the American media. People with expertise are most welcome to contribute to

our research but for our findings it is most essential for us to have the opinions and feedback of a

vast amount of media users who themselves are the actual drivers of the media. In a rapidly

globalizing world the internationalization of the media is growing fast. Hence it is important for us to

not get the opinions and feedback of only Americans but also the representatives of other countries

who have come to have an ever increasing effect on the media worldwide.

What also makes Facebook a suitable tool for crowdsourcing, is the fact that a very large

population across all demographics already has a registered account in Facebook. Therefore its users

would not need to register specifically for this research which would be the case with most of the

other platforms that would need to be established for this research. There is the presumption that

users do not like to register in order to participate in a study and hence using an already created

16

Facebook accounts, the participants can avoid a new registration only to be able to participate in this

research.

Twitter is another platform to be considered in our study. Twitter is an online micro-blogging

service that enables users to send and read "tweets" - short texts limited to 140 characters. Like

Facebook, users can access Twitter easily - either through the website interface, SMS, or mobile

device applications. Used by people in nearly every country in the world - 500 million registered users

in 2012 (Twitter 2013), who posted 340 million tweets every day - and it is a service available in more

than 20 languages. Twitter is a real-time information network that connects people to the latest

publicly shared stories, ideas, opinions and news about what its users find interesting. It is used by

finding the accounts one finds most compelling and following the tweets of these preferred accounts.

Twitter can be a very useful platform for a research considering a wide user base which can be

used for crowd-sourced research. This platform can also be used for trend testing by raising

suggestions relevant to research questions and following or counting the tweet replies.

Measurements for trending topics are automatically embedded in the application itself. Furthermore,

interested potential participants can be invited to a focus group by being given a link to either a

Delphi Platform or the Facebook Page created for the research. With Twitter, one can be sure of

getting a vast amount of possible diverse opinions and feedbacks, and hence the tool indeed is a

good one for opinion surveys. However, the user base of Twitter is not reaching such a wide

demographics as Facebook for instance, and also its users are not as much diverted towards

representing the youth, the determinants of the future, as in Facebook’s case.

Foresight Engine is a crowd-sourced forecasting platform developed by futurists as a serious

game. It is a platform for engaging various people in rapid conversations about pressing issues of the

future by using basic game dynamics to make it fun and to encourage participation (IFTF 2013). These

conversations take place in very short messages that players can build on by agreeing or disagreeing

with the ideas, or even expand them by taking them in new directions. The Foresight Engine (FE) is

open for everyone to join, so it does not limit itself to experts only. Anybody can register

17

anonymously and become a player in the game. Players earn points every time another player builds

on their idea. Game masters (or supervisors) control the game by labeling some played cards as

“super-interesting” and by blogging about key themes that emerged in the game. This way, the

supervisors also help participants to orientate in the fast-paced play. Games typically last 24-72

hours, and all one needs to play is a browser and an Internet connection. Registration is very simple,

free and allows for anonymity via virtual identity.

Results gathered by this type of a game are typically a big number of free unrestricted

thoughts - big number of individual “cards” played. Hence these results are very challenging to be

analyzed and in reality they often times are not. Some influential idea threads (decks) can be

followed and framed, and analyzed qualitatively. The only way how to group the qualitative data in

the results is to manually sort them out. Since all the results are free text (up to 140 characters) no

quantitative analysis is really possible apart from the mere game statistics of numbers of cards played

and reacted. To our knowledge, FE creators themselves do not have a good idea of how to use the

results and this research is not suggesting any either. The results gathered from a Foresight Engine

would be relevant for a crowdsourcing research where numerous ideas are generated by a large

panel.

However, the problem is the extracting of ideas from the results that would form a tangible

conclusion. The Foresight Engine is suitable for the exploration of fantasized future images, but it is

challenging to get clear results. In addition to this, the results from participants do not come with

references or credible supporting argumentations. Another quality of FE is that it is rather a new

media and as such it might be probably rather hard to market it to adults. The interface is not as

intuitive and easy to use. These qualities might discourage potential participants who do not want to

or have time to learn how to operate new software interface. Another feature of playing on FE is that

it tends to be a fast-paced game - especially if we get large number of participants which is our goal -

and this high speed is not comfortable to all personalities. In a class interview of people who have

played one game on FE in 2013 it was revealed that while some were very comfortable with the fast

pace and even made them excited and encouraged to participate more, for some others the fast pace

18

of arguments played was disorienting and preventing them from being focus and participate at all. In

this research however (arguably in all research aimed at general population), it would be beneficial to

include all people with all possible personality features. Using FE can serve as a filter to get only

people comfortable with fast-pace gaming and that is not favorable.

Prediction Market softwares or applications (e.g. Huunu) are designed for users to predict

occurrences like the market and its trends in a certain time period and within a certain industry. The

market prices, events and occurrences which are analyzed are then interpreted as assumptions or

predictions of the probability of unfolding events. For instance, a prediction market security might

reward one euro, if a certain prediction is elected, to the user who predicts correctly. Hence if this

user thinks the prediction could have a 70% chance of being elected he should be willing to pay 70

cents for this security (70% or 1€). No real money is actually involved, however. In this “stock market”

there are some who buy low and sell high and hence improve and are rewarded for the market

predictions. On the other hand those who buy high and sell low weaken the prediction and are

punished for it (Consensus Point, 2013).

Future markets and events for instance have been predicted with the help of Prediction

Market applications and these applications have been found to be good alternative for a forecasting

methodology. The data gathered from these applications is mainly qualitative and the advantage of

these applications is that they are made accessible in almost every computer or smartphone device

(applications) with the only constraint being internet access. Examples of where to use Prediction

Market Applications are forecasting, pricing, marketing intelligence, campaigns, products or

concepts. The downside of this application in a research like the US media is that our study looks at

multiple dimension and criteria, and needs to be open for ideas and suggestions. Our study also gives

one particular future to be evaluated and does not really give room for new predictions. Prediction

Market Softwares give users free hands for making predictions and evaluating their realization

probability.

19

Agora is an online platform for logical argumentation. It is a very good platform for iteration

and mapping of the logical construction of arguments. It has been designed by Michael Hoffman from

Georgia Institute of Technology (AGORA-net 2013). Under its full name “AGORA-net: Participate

Deliberate!” it is an interactive collaborative web-based argument mapping tool that stimulates

reasoning, reflection, critique, deliberation, and creativity in individual argument construction as well

as in collaborative or adversarial settings. Therefore, it is great at facilitating debates over some

factual based controversy, but might not be that useful for creative exploration of a future vision.

That said Agora is not well suited for use in this particular research project, as exploration of

Radical futures of media is rather a creative process. Results that would be possible to collect using

Agora would be maps of logical structure of an argument. Arguments given by participants are in a

form of iteration and should therefore lead to fact-based and/or logic-based outcomes. Since it works

with facts whereas future is unknown, this approach would limit research outcomes considerably.

The results would be high quality and well backed by arguments, the problem is that topics and ideas

that cannot be defended logically would be missing from the results.

Chosen platform:

After reviewing all the possibilities and weighing the up and down sides of each platform,

Facebook was chosen as the most suitable one for our research. The criteria that were looked at

when choosing the most suitable platform are categorized in the Research Methods Table above and

are based on the fact that in this research both qualitative and quantitative results are needed.

Details on how this research will utilize Facebook will be further discussed in the following chapter.

20

4. Research Plan

This research seeks to identify possible, preferable and probable future of the American

media in 2023, which we define as Bubbles in the Ocean of Information, by using the social media

platform Facebook as the main tool for gathering crowd sourced intelligence. As stated earlier, the

three-fold research question is: Is a future, in which information is overabundant and people are

highly selective of information sources, possible? Is this future probable? Is this future preferable?

4.1 Collecting Data

As discussed above, both qualitative and quantitative data will be used in this research.

Organized discussions in a Facebook group will allow for a qualitative research and participants of the

Facebook page will be asked to fill in an online poll which will then allow for the gathering of

quantitative data. The discussion group will be treated as a focus group, though on this big scale of a

collective intelligence the facilitation will be looser than in some smaller surveys. In a group of

hundreds, it is expected that discussions will not be as neatly disciplined and facilitated as in a group

of ten for instance. That has its up and down sides - valuable idea can emerge from a creative chaos

as well as get lost in it. Trying to discipline everything and facilitate in such a big scale discussion, it

will not only be impossible, but might prevent the creative quality for which the mass is employed.

Therefore, the facilitation will not be too strict.

For the collecting of qualitative data in this research a Facebook page will be created online in

order to harness collective intelligence. In the Facebook page relevant news, articles, videos,

artworks and questions regarding the future of the American media will be shared in order to spur

discussions. These “shares” will be chosen by the facilitators or organizers of the survey based on the

relevance in regards to both the ACTVOD table, the two identified main features of today’s Internet,

and the topic of US news media. Participants will be asked to freely comment on and like these posts.

This way we will be able to gather data and material as people share their opinions, beliefs,

viewpoints and perceptions about the future of the American media. In the discussion group users

can see others’ comments in real time, be inspired by them, further elaborate them or argue against

21

them. At the same time, researchers with the roles of facilitators can shape and revert the

discussions to stay on track, be reminded and remind others of the key drivers, provide answers to

questions or criticize users’ comments using references or their own opinions.

The quantitative part of the research will be carried out by creating a survey, linked to the

Facebook page, consisting of multiple-choice questions which will provide answers that can be

quantitatively analyzed. All participants of the discussions in the Facebook group will be invited to fill

in this survey. A research participant should ideally fill up this survey first before reading the posts in

the discussion group in order to limit bias and influence from the ideas presented there. To reach this

objective, the link to the survey will have a prominent visible place on top of the discussion group

website and participants will be offered a link to the survey as they first enter the Facebook group’s

page. Having this in mind, the last question of the survey will be a control question to check on this

bias. Questions of the survey will be the following:

1. How many different news media sources do you currently follow in a usual week?

(0-3, 4-6, 6-10, >10)

2. In the future, 2023, would you like to be following less or more different news media

sources? (less, more, same amount as now)

3. How much time do you spend reading one news story?

(Less than a minute, 1-5 min, 5-15 min, more than 15 min)

4. In a future, 2023, would you like to be spending less or more time on reading (receiving)

one news story ? (less, more, same amount as now)

5. What device do you use the most to read news information?

(smartphone, laptop, tablet, newspaper, other)

6. Do you trust American media houses (big news producing companies, nowadays usually

affiliated with TV channels or newspapers, or self-standing and reusing news from other

sources) and how would you evaluate your level of trust towards them?

(from 1 = no trust to 10 = absolute trust)

22

7. If you find yourself not agreeing with a stance or interpretation that an author of a news

story provides, how does that affect your subscription to further news from the same

producer in the following days? Do you read more from this source or less?

(more, less, same)

8. Have you read posts in the associated Facebook group before filling in this survey?

(yes, no, I do not know)

4.2 Analysing Data:

For analyzing the qualitative results of our survey we will use Opinion Mapping - a process in

which all the opinions and feedbacks are collected and sectioned under sub-headings and the one

taking the highest consideration or highest amount of similar answers “siblings” can be picked as the

viable result. Another consideration for analyzing qualitative results is using the Opinion Prognosis -

assessing the opinions close to previously shared opinions which have been successfully utilized in

the same field of study in the past.

Results from the quantitative research will be used to validate or challenge our assumptions

about present state (see the Introduction chapter and the two key features of the Internet above). In

addition to that, quantitative research results can support the qualitative research findings. Although

the qualitative research is future-oriented whether the quantitative is empirical-presence-oriented,

they can be combined to draw a trend and connect present with a future.

4.3 Attracting Participants

A high number of participants will be aimed to be achieved firstly by the attractivity of joining

the group. “Be part of the discussion about future of the American media” will be the theme of our

idea-sharing group on Facebook, which is called “Bubbles in the Ocean of the American media”.

Secondly, in order to get the critical mass of participants we will attract people to like our Facebook

page with a reward based on a lottery draw where the first price is an iPad or some other popular

23

media device. Second, third and fourth places will be rewarded with minor prices like magazine

subscriptions chosen by the winners themselves. Our goal is in the range of a thousand likes and

visitors of our Facebook page, out of which at least a few hundred are expected to take part in the

discussions and hence provide a good, competent volume of qualitative data. The same number is

also expected to fill in the quantitative survey, hence providing quantitative data for the research.

5. Findings and Conclusion

From the information gathered from both the qualitative and quantitative data various

alternate results can be expected. The quantitative part (see chapter 4) is expected to deliver such

results which will validate our presumptions from chapter one: either support them, refute them, or

possibly offer only an inconclusive result. By doing some statistical analysis we are able to see the

pattern of which direction the answers in general point towards. These results can then later be used

as a base for the qualitative research and for further drawing a trend from present state towards a

future state of the US media.

The qualitative data which is gathered from the online discussion on Facebook can be

analyzed by using Opinion mapping and prognosis as described above. Through the mapping of the

posts’ popularity, according to how many answers each post generated, a trend can be generated.

Credibility of the results will of course be dependent on the number of research participants and the

representativeness of the sample, i.e. whether there will be a sufficient amount of participants and

whether there will be sufficient representation of all genders and age groups (mainly young people).

Based on all these findings, a conclusion will be drawn on whether the suggested radical future,

Bubbles in the ocean, is possible or not, whether this future is actually preferable and how probable it

is.

24

5.1. Critical Examination of the Research Plan

In this chapter we will critically examine the strengths and weaknesses of this research plan

and look at possible solutions for facilitating like drawbacks that may occur in the implementation

phase of this research project.

In the beginning of the research, an extensive literature review is needed to be done. In

academic journals and amongst the reports of media research institutes there might be a lot of useful

findings that will support the initial and pre-work with designing the survey, the discussion group and

providing insightful understanding based on which material for the discussion posts can be chosen.

The lack of past experience of conducting online research as well as the fact that a study on Facebook

has not been conducted by us before leads to the fact that this indeed is a novice study of this kind

for us.

Considering the above six possible platforms with which the research can be conducted, the

choice of Facebook is not absolutely certain. The choice of this platform is somewhat arbitrary and

arguments in favor of using this particular platform are not extremities of the other possible

platforms. The same arguments that were used for and against Facebook can be used also with some

of the other social media platforms which were considered. However, the main merits of Facebook in

this research are: its widespread use in the USA and also globally (providing extensive and wide

demographics of participants, especially amongst the young) and the ease of use (providing higher

number and commitment of participants), as well as the ease of its facilitation. These arguments are

indeed valid and perfectly legitimate.

A weak spot of the research is the uncertain participation in the Facebook group. Similar to a

Delphi study, the researchers have to get participants to take part and be active in the Facebook

group and its discussions. In the case of crowd intelligence and using Facebook, the question is rather

much about marketing skills and attractiveness of participating. Since the credibility of the results

depend also on a high number of participants, skilled marketing and promotion of the research is

25

vital. For that, experience from similar previously conducted researches can be utilized. In general,

participation itself has to be made attractive and there is a space for improvement here. In order to

widen the participant pool a concurrent, parallel tool could be utilized for data collection. The already

incorporated ideas to ensure participation are good, nonetheless. For instance, the suggested lottery

prize is a well-proven motivation for people to participate in surveys and questionnaires.

A subsequent problematic spot is the usability of the collected qualitative results. Not only the

number of participants is uncertain but the quality of answers might not match expectations. The

qualitative method may require enhancements to be able to cope with diverse input which the

discussions might produce - participants writing short comments, or long posts, or sending mere links

to other sources. The data analysis will most likely be time consuming and may require a vast amount

of resources. The quantitative research on the other hand needs a test-run and robust thinking about

precise wording of the survey questions. From the experience of other researchers, participants can

always surprise with understanding the question differently than the researchers or creators of the

survey. All in all, ensuring the collection of credible and usable results can be a challenge in this

research.

5.2 Further Research

Based on the specific results of the research, further inquiry into the topic would be welcome.

More scenario work can take the research further. For instance, if the researched future turns out to

be a preferable future to people, then a backcasting scenario study can help provide a roadmap

towards this future. If the future turns out to be unpreferable, this finding can be offered to public

with educational means and to serve as a base for better informed decision making of the regulators

of the media industry. Especially in the case of this future being evaluated as unpreferable, the work

of alternative scenarios can be done in order to identify and make a future that is preferable.

Another possibility how to enhance the research and robustness of the results is having the

outcomes evaluated by experts, or including them in the process from the beginning by using a

26

Delphi method. This way the opinions of the demographics would be taken into account for

evaluating especially the preferability of the suggested future, Bubbles in the Ocean of Information,

and also to see the public’s perception of the possibility and probability of this future to materialize.

On the other hand experts’ knowledge is vital to give some scientific data and knowledge to add up

on the probability and possibility of this suggested future.

The future of media in the USA in any case cannot be precisely predicted. Its futures are

indeed multiple and interesting. However, looking at possible future outcomes or just one, like in this

case, can help people to perceive the path the American news media is or may be taking.

Acknowledging the one or many possibilities can be crucial in helping influence and direct the future

to the desired direction.

27

6. References

AGORA-net (2013) About us. <http://agora.gatech.edu/?page_id=6>, retrieved 21.11.2013

Bell, Wendell (1996) Foundations of Futures Studies - Human Science for a New Era. Transaction

Publishers, New Jersey.

Bloomberg Businessweek (2013) Company Overview of Facebook, Inc. Bloomberg Businessweek.

<http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapId=207654

63>, retrieved 15.11.2013.

Camilleri, V. (2011) Diplomatic Reporting in the Internet Era. Diplo.

<http://www.diplomacy.edu/resources/general/diplomatic-reporting-internet-era>, retireved

18.11.2013.

Consensus Point (2013) Huunu. Consensus Point. <http://www.consensuspoint.com/wp-

content/themes/radius/whitepapers/HuunuBrochure.pdf>, retrieved 12.11.2013.

Drymonas, E – Efentakis, A – Pfoser, D. (2011) Opinion Mapping Travelblogs. In: Proceedings of the

Terra Cognita Conference/Workshop, ed. by Efthymios Drymonas – Alexandros Efentakis –

Dieter Pfoser. Athens, Greece, October, 2011.

Freedom House (2013) United States. Freedom of the Press 2013.

<http://www.freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-press/2013/united-states>, retrieved

10.11.2013.

Gabler, N. (2009) “Truth” vs. “Facts” from America’s media. Los Angeles Times.

<http://articles.latimes.com/2009/aug/23/opinion/oe-gabler23>, retrieved 15.11.2013.

28

Glenn, C. J. (2009) Futures Research Methodology — V3.0. The Millennium Project; 3.0 edition, DC.

Gordon, T. J. - Pease, A. (2006). RT Delphi: An Efficient, “Round-less”, Almost Real Time Delphi

Method. Journal of Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 73 (4), 321-333.

IFTF (2013) Engaged Foresight in Action. <http://www.iftf.org/what-we-do/foresight-

tools/collaborative-forecasting-games/foresight-engine/>, retrieved 21.11.2013

Kuusi, Osmo. “Scientific basis of Delphi Method, Futures research scientific knowledge validation and

argumentation.” Philosophical, Methodological and Pragmatic Approaches to Scientific

Futures Research. Calonia Auditorium, Turku. 7 Nov. 2013. Lecture.

Lutz, A. (2012) These 6 Corporations Control 90% Of The Media In America. Business Insider.

<http://www.businessinsider.com/these-6-corporations-control-90-of-the-media-in-america-

2012-6>, retrieved 18.11.2013.

Newman, A. (2013) As Trust in U.S. Media Plummets, Journalists Seeks “Truth in Media”. The New

American. <http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/15778-as-trust-in-u-s-

press-plummets-journalist-seeks-truth-in-media>, retrieved 12.11.2013.

Shah, A. (2012) Media in the United States. Global Issues.

<http://www.globalissues.org/article/163/media-in-the-united-states#USPressFreedom>,

retrieved 10.11.2013.

Smith, C. (2013) The Planet's 24 Largest Social Media Sites, And Where Their Next Wave Of Growth

Will Come From. Business Insider. <http://www.businessinsider.com/a-global-social-media-

census-2013-

10?utm_source=Triggermail&utm_medium=email&utm_term=Master%20411%20%2B%20Ne

wsletters&utm_campaign=BI%20Intelligence%2011192013>, retrieved 12.11.2013.

29

Smith, C. (2013) 7 Statistics About Facebook Users That Reveal Why It's Such A Powerful Marketing

Platform. Business Insider. <http://www.businessinsider.com/a-primer-on-facebook-

demographics-2013-

10?utm_source=Triggermail&utm_medium=email&utm_term=Master%20411%20%2B%20Ne

wsletters&utm_campaign=BI%20Intelligence%2011192013>, retrieved 17.11.2013

Twitter (2013). About Us Page. < https://about.twitter.com/>, retrieved 03.22.2013.