1. Executive Summary
2010 Survey on
Social Journalism

2. 2010 Survey on Social Journalism
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF RESULTS
A broad online survey across all media was conducted by Cision, in conjunction with
the University of Sunderland. The survey included journalists from the UK, France and
Germany, and is designed to enhance the media industry’s understanding of social media
uptake and the impact of social media technologies and processes on journalists’ work.
A total of 549 valid responses are included in these results.
KEY FINDINGS
1. Social Media Complements Traditional Channels
Journalists across all three markets were largely in agreement that social media sites
were an important working tool. However, social media is being used in conjunction with
more traditional sources, such as press releases or direct contact with PRs. Importantly,
while social media is playing an increased role in the journalist’s day-to-day life, personal
contacts remain one of the leading sources for stories and fact checking.
2. Wikipedia Most Used Social Media Source
Respondents tended to find stories from traditional sources, such as contacts,
PRs and corporate sites. They also actively used Wikipedia to source stories, particularly
in Germany where use of the site was around twice that seen elsewhere. Wikipedia was
also used for fact-checking, with over 60% of respondents using the site to check stories
at least once a week, compared to 22% for blogs, or 34% for news wire services.
3. Journalists Perceive PRs As Not Understanding Social Media
One-third of respondents in the UK felt that PRs did not understand social media.
The journalists’ perception is that PRs seldom communicate with them via social
platforms, despite their regular use of social media platforms to source stories.
Page 1

3. INTRODUCTION
The wave of search and collaborative (“Web 2.0”) technologies that have accompanied
the spread of broadband over the past ten years are wholly rewriting the rules of publishing.
It has become commonplace for individuals to publish content online, ranging from photos
from day-to-day life to world-historical events scooped on a mobile phone. At the same
time, this proliferation of content, and the changing structures through which it is delivered,
have severely undermined the economic foundations of traditional media.
In many respects, the consequences for journalism have been well documented. Newsrooms
have been redesigned to better channel online news gathering; while traditional roles have
been outsourced, replicated by technology, or demolished outright. The profession as a
whole has been subject to extreme cuts, piling pressure on remaining staff.
Yet the intersection of journalism and social media – the ways in which journalists use
social media in their work – has been subject to considerably less examination. As a
provider of workflow software and services for the communications industry, it is essential
that Cision understand and reflect the changing ways in which journalists communicate
– with PRs, with the public, with their friends and colleagues – in order to create the most
effective solutions for our clients.
Earlier research by Cision North America and Cision Scandinavia firmly suggested the
growing significance of social and other digital media in the lives of journalists in these
regions. Whether working in ink or pixels, they were clearly using blogs, Twitter and Google.
Yet quite how journalists made use of these technologies was not entirely clear. In July
2010, we asked that question directly to journalists in France, Germany, and the UK.
Drawing a sample from the millions of journalists profiled in our Media Database,
we approached journalists across a broad range of media types, interests and locales.
Most were aged between 24 and 44, but younger and older age groups were also well
represented. A large majority of the respondents had been journalists for more than
ten years.
The following provides an overview of the UK results while referencing findings from
Germany and France where comparisons were relevant.
Page 2

4. DETAILED SUMMARY OF RESULTS
7%
The social newsroom
5%
Social media are well established as a complementary working utensil
ant
r ta t
for journalists in the UK, Germany and France – but particularly the UK.
por t
po ha
nt
i m ew
74 per cent of the UK journalists said that social media had become an
Unim
Un Som
32%
Imp er 14%
important tool in their work, while in Germany and France a little over or t ith
ant Ne t Nor
50 per cent thought it important. n ant
r t a or t
po
Im nimp
U
It’s important to stress that this does not reflect the technographic split
of the sample – when asked about the importance of online and social
Somew ant
media in their lives, the journalists were more evenly divided, with as
Import
many as 50 per cent of German respondents stating that they were
hat
either “unimportant” or somewhat “unimportant” outside the office.
Networking sites such as LinkedIn and Facebook were identified as the 42%
single most important social technology for journalism by approximately
30 per cent of UK respondents, with Twitter not far behind. Again,
the picture in Germany and France was similar, although French How important has social media
journalists appear comparatively Twitter-verse. Despite this, and the become in your work?
broader range of sites used in France and Germany (Xing in Germany,
for example), Twitter, LinkedIn and Facebook were the most-used
platforms in all three countries.
According to our study, there has been a significant increase in journalists’
use of social media and search engines over the past three years. 5%
3%
However, traditional tools are not being relegated – only a small minority
Review s.com
6%
epinion
of respondents reported using traditional channels either more or less O th 26%
er
No
than they did three years ago. Online tools are supplementing rather
sites e.g
ne
g
in
g g ter
than replacing traditional communications. 12% Pho o blo Twit
s h a to / V i icr g.
M e.
.
F li c r ing s i d e o
k r o te s
r Yo e.g.
uTu
be
So tes g or
si Xin
ci e.g Fa
al . c
Ne Lin eb
tw ke oo
s
or dIn k
og
ki ,
Bl
ng
20%
1
28%
2
3
4 What social media do you use to publish,
promote and distribute your content?
5
0% 20 40 60 80 100
Compared with three years ago, how often do you use the
following in your work?
1 PRs More now than three years ago
2 Corporate Sites About the same as three years ago
3 Press Releases Less now than three years ago
4 Search
5 Social Media
Page 3

5. DETAILED SUMMARY OF RESULTS
Journalists at work 14%
15%
The chart on the right shows the relative proportion of UK respondents
Co
h
using various media and communications tools for sourcing stories more
arc
nt a
Se
7%
cts
than once a week. At this level, there is an even split between social 6%
media and more traditional approaches to sourcing, such as personal W ir
es it ter
Tw
contacts, newswires and corporate websites. Search engines remain the
Social 7%
key online technology here, with a little over a quarter of UK respondents Networks
11% PRs
turning to social channels to source stories. Blo
Re to / V
gs
te
Ph
v ie
te r a
This picture was remarkably consistent across all three territories,
o
w
Si or p o
8%
Wikipedia
Si
s
te
although German use of Wikipedia was around twice that elsewhere.
C
s
ide
This was a trend repeated through the journalistic process. It is clear
o
13% 5%
from comments made by German respondents that this is not necessarily 5%
an issue of greater trust in the online encyclopedia: most respondents 9%
flagged the need to check the validity of Wikipedia entries as much as
other social sources.
When sourcing stories, do you use the
Differences between social and traditional tools become more apparent following frequently (more than once
when journalists were asked about fact-checking (See the table below). a week)?
Here we clearly identify a preference for research and validation through
PRs, personal contacts and corporate websites – though again, Wikipedia
was more frequently used at this level in Germany than anywhere else.
Our survey firmly suggests that social media’s prime purpose in journalism
comes in the promotion of their work. (See the chart on the right). 54 per 26%
cent of UK journalists indicated that microblogging and social networking
M g. T
28%
e.
icr w i
were among their main channels for distributing their work. There was g
kin ,
ob t te
or in
lo r
a greater reliance on social networking in Germany and France, tw ked ook
gg
e
l N Lin eb
in
where attitudes toward Twitter appear more suspicious, but the picture cia .g. ac
g
So es e or F
was much the same. This self-promotion suggests that the longstanding . sit Xing
sites e.g
Review s.com
entrepreneurial nature of journalism is perhaps becoming more inion
Flickr g sites e.g.
5% ep
Tube
er
sharin / Video
pronounced amid the uncertainty that clouds the industry. O th
or You
3% ne
No
Bl
og
Photo
s
1 6%
20%
2
3 12%
4
5
6
7
When promoting your work, do you use the
8 following frequently (more the once a week)?
9
10
11
0% 20 40 60 80 100
How often do you use the following for fact-checking your stories?
1 Contacts 7 Photo / Video Never (0 times a month)
2 Wires 8 Blogs Occasionally (1-2 times a month)
3 PRs 9 Social Networks Often (Once a week)
4 Corporate Sites 10 Twitter Very Often (More than once a week)
5 Wikipedia 11 Search All the Time (Once a day or more)
6 Review Sites
Page 4

6. DETAILED SUMMARY OF RESULTS
7% 3%
Social media and PR
We asked the journalists to what extent they agreed with the statement
Agree Completely
Disag tely
C omp
that “PRs understand how to use social media”. Although 25 per cent
ree
23%
le
of UK respondents believe PRs agreed “somewhat” or “completely”,
25% ree
32 per cent disagreed, suggesting a general perception that PRs lack Dis A g hat
Somagree ew
ew h om
the knowledge and understanding of social media and how best to use it. at S
This perception is underscored by the ways in which journalists currently
communicate with the PR community.
Don’t Agree /
Traditional channels still dominate this dialogue, with 57 per cent of
Disagree
journalists claiming that PRs still mainly rely on press releases and phone
calls. The journalists’ perception is that PRs seldom communicate with
them via social platforms – much less web/video conferences – in their 42%
regular work.
There appears to be a real opportunity for both journalists and PRs to
To what extent do you agree with the following
better use social channels. There is certainly considerable appetite
statement? “PRs understand how to use
among journalists for social media activity. At the same time, it is clear
social media”.
that journalists in all three countries continue to cherish PRs’ traditional
strengths: providing access to the best contacts and interviews, an in-depth
understanding of organisations and their issues, professionalism with a
personal touch.
5% 7%
Such skills are very much transferable to the social space. Certainly most 5%
LinkedIn
Face to
journalists would welcome some trustworthy professionalism in social Fa c
8%
media: 66 per cent of respondents stated that information delivered via
ebo
Bl
Face
og
social media is slightly or much less reliable than that delivered by other
ok
24%
channels, with only 5 per cent considering it more reliable – statistics 6% Twit te ph one
r Tele
that go some way toward explaining the journalists’ fondness for self-
edia
promotion ahead of sourcing and validating. The kind of problems one ial M We
Soc ase Co b / Vi
e
would expect surfaced in responses from all three countries: lack of 10% Rel nfe de
ren o
Press Release
ce
accountability, anonymity, and relevance. 2%
But it was also clear that when the source is trusted, social channels are great
way to connect: as one UK respondent said, social media is more reliable
“as you’re going straight to the source” – a view echoed in all countries.
33%
3% What channels you frequently (more than once
a week) use to talk with journalists?
Slightly
More Reliabl
26%
ble
29% lia
Abo s Re
es
e
ut t
he S hL
am
e Muc
A Lot Mor
e Rel iable
2%
Less Re
Slightly
liable
Compared with
traditional offline
channels, how reliable 40%
is social media?
Page 5

7. ABOUT THE SURVEY
In July 2010, Cision Media Research, linked with the University of Sunderland, completed
an online survey in the UK, France and Germany simultaneously. The survey was designed
to enhance the media industry’s understanding of social media uptake and the impact of
social media technologies and processes on journalists’ work.
Respondents were taken from Cision’s media database of more than 1.5 million influencers
globally. Country-specific sub-panels were set up and 5,000 journalists per country were invited
with broad spread of work experience, media types as well as geographies.
Below is an outline of the respondents for each country:
UK Germany France
Most respondents aged 24- Most respondents aged All ages even represented
34, 35-44 but all age groups 35-44, 45-54 by respondents
well represented
Fewer younger respondents A large majority have been
A large majority have been journalists for more than
A large majority have been
journalists for more than ten years
journalists for more than
ten years
ten years n = 139
n = 279
n = 131
Cision will conduct this survey on an annual basis to continue to inform on best practices within
the PR and communications field and to deepen the industry’s understanding of how journalists
and professional communicators use and value social media and other resources. Please
contact research.europe@cision.com if you wish to participate in the next survey securing your
timely access to survey results and analyses.
ABOUT CISION
Cision (uk.cision.com) empowers businesses to make better decisions and improve
performance through its CisionPoint software solutions for corporate communication and
PR professionals. Powered by local experts with global reach, Cision delivers relevant media
information, targeted distribution, media monitoring, and precise media analysis. Cision has
offices in Europe, North America and Asia, and has partners in 125 countries. Cision AB is
quoted on the Nordic Stock Exchange with revenues of SEK 1.5 billion in 2009.
Visit uk.cision.com
Call 0800 358 3110 (From outside the UK: + 44 (0) 207 689 1160)
Email info.uk@cision.com
Page 6