Journalism awards as a site of contention in the field of journalism

In the last few decades, journalism awards of all kinds have proliferated exponentially in scope and number across different countries. In Western countries with a mature media culture and a highly competitive market, news media, big or small, have increasingly sought after industry awards as they vie for status distinction, public recognition, and ultimately market share (Bates, 2010; Hatcher, 2007). In the US, for example, there are more than 200 national and local media contests each year. Journalism awards have become a staple of newsroom lore and advertising departments’ sales promotions, thus constituting “an integral part of American journalism” (Shepard, 2000, p. 24). In transitioning societies with a growing media industry, journalism awards have also sprouted and rapidly multiplied – a reflection of the emerging belief in the primacy of market competition and the principles of professional autonomy. China, for example, has witnessed a fast-growing number of journalism awards, a development that coincides with China’s deepened social and economic reforms beginning in the 1990s. In the midst of China’s intensive media transformation, journalism awards have been instituted at all levels (e.g. nation state, province, city), by different sponsors (e.g. government, journalism associations, business corporations, and grassroots non-governmental organizations [NGOs]), and with a wide range of genres, including many that are new (e.g. environmental news, investigative reporting). Professional awards are an important form of recognition in fields of cultural production. Practically speaking, they are intended to identify and reward what are considered the best practices in the field. Yet, from a sociological perspective, they also “raise fundamental value problems for juries, for winners, for their peers, and for others concerned with recognition processes” (Heinich, 2009, p. 86). In the highly competitive field of journalism, awards need to be understood as a prime site of contention. The contention is both ideological and economic, in which different social actors joust for professional jurisdiction, battle over discursive territory, and compete for symbolic resources to maximize their social and economic positions, not only in the media arena but also in society at large. In this process, different social actors are integrated into different matrixes of social relations that are divided by competing ideological traditions, polarized by political powers, and fueled by economic interests. Journalism awards thus become a site of tug-of-war, where different interpretations, priorities, and options are debated, contested, and sometimes resolved into a general consensus. Who, then, are the principle players in this contest? Media organizations are of course one of the key stakeholders in the process. To the news media, journalism awards are the most effective way to establish, retain, and cement the kind of credibility that they seek in the marketplace. Individual journalists also have a stake in journalism awards, since such awards can bring them recognition as experts on issues they cover. Journalism awards also crystallize the culture of the field and