The research impact of broadcast programming reconsidered: Academic involvement in programme-making

This commentary responds to an article by Melissa Grant, Lucy Vernall and Kirsty Hill in Research for All (Grant et al. , 2018) that assessed the impact of broadcast programming through quantitative and qualitative evidence. In that piece, the authors attended exclusively to the uptake by, and a...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Sean Williams
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: UCL Press 2019-08-01
Series:Research for All
Online Access:https://www.scienceopen.com/document?vid=0f2a7e38-4e49-45f3-8ae6-c69003687a3c
id doaj-b411ab8c9fc641afbc44dddf99b46fb1
record_format Article
spelling doaj-b411ab8c9fc641afbc44dddf99b46fb12020-12-16T09:42:53ZengUCL PressResearch for All2399-81212019-08-0110.18546/RFA.03.2.08The research impact of broadcast programming reconsidered: Academic involvement in programme-makingSean WilliamsThis commentary responds to an article by Melissa Grant, Lucy Vernall and Kirsty Hill in Research for All (Grant et al. , 2018) that assessed the impact of broadcast programming through quantitative and qualitative evidence. In that piece, the authors attended exclusively to the uptake by, and attitudes of, end users. But viewer or social media statistics can paint a patchy picture, and feedback groups recreate an unusually attentive mode of reception. This commentary argues for an alternative or complementary emphasis on the participation of academics in producing broadcast programming for the purposes of writing REF impact templates. In highlighting the process of programme-making rather than the reception of a completed output, the commentary seeks to 'read' academic impact on the media in a more dynamic way, and speaks to the sometimes substantial and substantive involvement of academics prior to a programme's broadcast and its ultimate effects in the public sphere. Indeed, a focus on the 'front-loaded' impact by academics in the media, and on their longer-term institutional ripple effects, offers evidence that is more easily captured than establishing the attitudes of audiences. The latter are notoriously difficult to determine and, as Grant et al .'s (2018) data show, do not always do justice to the importance of media work as part of impactful academic activity.https://www.scienceopen.com/document?vid=0f2a7e38-4e49-45f3-8ae6-c69003687a3c
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Sean Williams
spellingShingle Sean Williams
The research impact of broadcast programming reconsidered: Academic involvement in programme-making
Research for All
author_facet Sean Williams
author_sort Sean Williams
title The research impact of broadcast programming reconsidered: Academic involvement in programme-making
title_short The research impact of broadcast programming reconsidered: Academic involvement in programme-making
title_full The research impact of broadcast programming reconsidered: Academic involvement in programme-making
title_fullStr The research impact of broadcast programming reconsidered: Academic involvement in programme-making
title_full_unstemmed The research impact of broadcast programming reconsidered: Academic involvement in programme-making
title_sort research impact of broadcast programming reconsidered: academic involvement in programme-making
publisher UCL Press
series Research for All
issn 2399-8121
publishDate 2019-08-01
description This commentary responds to an article by Melissa Grant, Lucy Vernall and Kirsty Hill in Research for All (Grant et al. , 2018) that assessed the impact of broadcast programming through quantitative and qualitative evidence. In that piece, the authors attended exclusively to the uptake by, and attitudes of, end users. But viewer or social media statistics can paint a patchy picture, and feedback groups recreate an unusually attentive mode of reception. This commentary argues for an alternative or complementary emphasis on the participation of academics in producing broadcast programming for the purposes of writing REF impact templates. In highlighting the process of programme-making rather than the reception of a completed output, the commentary seeks to 'read' academic impact on the media in a more dynamic way, and speaks to the sometimes substantial and substantive involvement of academics prior to a programme's broadcast and its ultimate effects in the public sphere. Indeed, a focus on the 'front-loaded' impact by academics in the media, and on their longer-term institutional ripple effects, offers evidence that is more easily captured than establishing the attitudes of audiences. The latter are notoriously difficult to determine and, as Grant et al .'s (2018) data show, do not always do justice to the importance of media work as part of impactful academic activity.
url https://www.scienceopen.com/document?vid=0f2a7e38-4e49-45f3-8ae6-c69003687a3c
work_keys_str_mv AT seanwilliams theresearchimpactofbroadcastprogrammingreconsideredacademicinvolvementinprogrammemaking
AT seanwilliams researchimpactofbroadcastprogrammingreconsideredacademicinvolvementinprogrammemaking
_version_ 1724381541227823104