Two essays on robot journalism in the South Korean newspaper industry = 로봇저널리즘에 대한 두 가지 고찰: 한국의 신문 산업을 중심으로

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

In recent years, robot journalism has become prevalent in news media, and, accordingly, this type of journalism has been often discussed in media studies. Scholars tend to pay attention to the technical level of robot journalists.
The prevalence of a new technology or system in an organization is not only determined by its inherent capacities, but also by main agents’ perceptions or attitudes towards it; because the agents could serve as significant factors to influence organizational judgments about the introduction of the new technology. In this light, it is essential to find out what and how main agents in the organizations consider robot journalism, when it comes to understanding of the introduction of robot journalism in the media industry.
This study focused on two agents in newspaper companies: C-level executives and journalists. In this study, those are regarded as significant factors in the newspaper industry with regard to the introduction of robot journalism.
This study carried two main topics: decision-making structure of C-level executives of newspapers in introducing robot journalism into newsrooms; and newspaper journalists’ attitudes towards robot journalism.
Above all, this study thus attempted to identify the determinants of chief officers of newspapers in the adoption of robot journalism.
This study sought to identify the determinants of chief officers of newspapers in introducing robot journalism into newsrooms. The AHP was employed as a methodology, and data to be analysed were obtained from 42 surveys on chief officers from 24 different newspaper companies.
According to the results, a prospected business performance brought about by the introduction of robot journalism and news consumers’ willingness to read robot-written news stories are top concerns among the criteria for the consideration of whether newspaper companies plan to introduce robot journalism or not. On the other hand, journalists’ attitude towards robot journalism is behind considerations for business performance and changes of external market environment. In terms of alternatives, the decrease in the number of human journalists after the adoption of robot-writers is most likely to be selected as an employment strategy by newspaper companies.
Decision-makers in newspaper companies seemed to be insensitive to sunken costs with regard to the introduction of robot journalism. The fall in the number of human journalists after adopting robots is most likely to be selected as an employment strategy.
Another study in the dissertation addressed newspaper journalists’ attitudes towards robot journalism. It identified the three types of newspaper journalists regarding writer robots by employing Q-methodology. The data analysed were drawn from Q-sorting for 47 journalists from 17 newspapers.
Through the analysis, this study found out three newspaper journalists towards robot journalism. The first type completely disregards robot journalism. Journalists in type 1 have an idea that journalism is beyond robots’ capabilities. Therefore, type 1 is labelled as journalism’s elitism. The second type has the Frankenstein complex, which means it is more concerned about the introduction of robots based on dismal scenarios. The last type has a relatively rosy view, which focuses on a positive blueprint with the recognition of some threats.
This study applies the previous results to the model of innovation resistance proposed by Sheth (1981). As a result, this work reveals that the first type belongs to ‘habit resistance’, and the second type does belong to ‘dual resistance’. The third type is included in ‘risk resistance’.
Through the two studies, this study draws three implications in introducing robot journalism. First, it is highly probable that newspaper companies will introduce robot journalism into their newsrooms. In consideration of the adoption of robot journalism, the weight of alternatives with the adoption of robot journalists is .804.
Second, the conflict about job security between C-level executives and journalists would be a crucial factor for the smooth prevalence of robot journalism, considering journalists’ resistance towards the chances of job insecurity and C-level executives’ low regard for journalists in introducing robot journalism.
Third, the prevalence of robot journalism in newsrooms would be influenced by the degree of trust in the technological level of robot journalism. The two agents in this study have a general agreement on the technical limitations of robot journalism. In this situation, the technical reliability of robot journalism would be a prerequisite for its full-fledged spread in the media industry.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 1. Introduction……………………………………………………... 1
• 2. Chapter 1. Technology and journalism……………………… 5
• 1. Birth of mass communications: 1600s~1960s……………...... 5
• 2. From CTS to habitual use of computer: 1970s~2000s..……... 6
• 3. Online and new mediators for news delivery………………... 10
• 3. Chapter 2. Overview on robot journalism.………………….. 13
• 1. Deep learning………………………………..……………...... 13
• 2. Definition of robot journalism……………………...………... 16
• 3. Roles of robot journalists…………………...………………... 23
• 4. Practical cases of robot journalism.………………………...... 25
• 5. Changes in journalism and journalist’ roles…………………. 28
• 4. Chapter 3. The first study-Newspaper companies’ determinants of the adoption of robot journalism: from the perspective of chief officers
• 30
• 1. Purpose of the first study…………………………………….. 30
• 2. Literature review……………………………………………... 31
• 2.1. Institutional entrepreneurship and structural inertia…….. 31
• 2.2. Institutional isomorphism…...…………………………... 34
• 3. Research question..…………………………………………... 35
• 4. Methodology…………………………………………………. 38
• 4.1. Analytic hierarchy process ………….………………….. 38
• 4.2. Criteria…………………………………………………... 39
• 4.2.1. Internal condition…………………………………….. 40
• 4.2.2. Market forecasting…………………………………… 44
• 4.2.3. Institutional isomorphism……………………………. 45
• 4.3. Alternatives……………………………………………… 47
• 4.4. Data collection…………………………………………... 49
• 4.5. Data analysis…………………………………………….. 51
• 5. Finding……………………………………………………….. 52
• 5.1. Criteria weight…………………………………………... 52
• 5.2. Alternatives……………………………………………… 53
• 6. Conclusion…………………………………………………… 56
• 5. Chapter 4. The second study-Newspaper journalists’ attitudes towards robot journalism.……………
• 60
• 1. Purpose of the second study…………………………………. 60
• 2. Literature review……………………………………………... 62
• 2.1. Attitude to accept new technology………………..…….. 62
• 2.2. Individuals’ resistance towards an organizational change 64
• 2.3. Innovation resistance……………………………………. 67
• 3. Research question....…………………………………………. 70
• 4. Methodology…………………...…………………………….. 71
• 4.1. Q-methodology...………………………………………... 71
• 4.2. Q-statement………..…………………………………….. 73
• 4.3. Q-sorting and P-sample…………………………………. 77
• 4.4. Q-factor analysis…………...……………………………. 80
• 5. Finding……………………………………………………….. 88
• 5.1. Type 1: Journalism’s elitism—fairly resistant type……... 92
• 5.2. Type 2: Frankenstein complex— high resistant type…… 94
• 5.3. Type 3: Rosy view—a bit resistant type………………… 96
• 5.4. Discussion………..……………………………………… 98
• 5.5. Analysis of factors in light of innovation resistance... 102
• 6. Conclusion………………....………………………………… 106
• 6. Chapter 5. Overall discussion of findings in this dissertation 111
• Reference……………………………………………………...
• 116
• Appendix……………………………………………………… 151
• 1. Detailed information of the final sample in the first study.. 151
• 2. A questionnaire for the first study………………………… 153
• 3. A questionnaire for the second study……………………... 176
• Abstract in Korean…………………………………………... 184