Reimagining and Revolutionizing Media History Research: Problems and Possibilities

Abstract

Organizations like the American Journalism Historians Association, publications like American Journalism, and many individual scholars have begun efforts to make media history more diverse, equitable, and inclusive. Yet despite these group and individual efforts, methodological approaches remain tied to systems and norms that are inherently inequitable. This essay argues for a paradigm shift in how media history research is done by delineating methodological hurdles faced by one researcher, discussion of the problems media historians face, and an acknowledgment of the work being done to make the field more equitable.

Disclosure Statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1 Claudio Baraldi, Giancarlo Corsi, and Elena Esposito, Unlocking Luhmann: A Keyword Introduction to Systems Theory, 1st ed (Bielefeld, Germany: Verlag/Bielefeld University Press, 2021), https://doi.org/10.14361/9783839456743.

2 Baraldi, Corsi, and Esposito, Unlocking Luhmann, 221.

3 Elena Esposito, Katrin Sold, and Bénédicte Zimmermann, “Systems Theory and Algorithmic Futures: Interview with Elena Esposito,” Constructivist Foundations 16, no. 3 (2021): 357.

4 Esposito, Sold, and Zimmermann, “Systems Theory,” 358–359.

5 Paula Hamilton and Mary Spongberg, “Twenty Years On: Feminist Histories and Digital Media,” Women’s History Review 26, no. 5 (September 3, 2017): 671.

6 Nydia A. Swaby and Chandra Frank, “Archival Experiments, Notes and (Dis)Orientations,” Feminist Review 125, no. 1 (July 2020): 4.

7 Koser, “Recovery and Obsolescence,” 199–200.

8 Michelle Moravec, “Feminist Research Practices and Digital Archives,” Australian Feminist Studies 32, no. 91–92 (April 3, 2017): 188.

9 Moravec, “Feminist Research,” 188.

10 Nicola Wilson et al., “Digital Critical Archives, Copyright, and Feminist Praxis,” Archival Science 22, no. 3 (September 2022): 304.

11 Koser, “Recovery and Obsolescence,” 199.

12 Koser, “Recovery and Obsolescence,” 201.

13 Tyrone McKinley Freeman and Kim Williams-Pulfer, “Liberating the Archive, Emancipating Philanthropy: Philanthropic Archival Layering as a Critical Historical Approach for Researching Voluntary Action in Marginalized Communities,” VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations 33, no. 6 (December 2022): 1116.

14 Maria Cotera, “‘Invisibility Is an Unnatural Disaster’: Feminist Archival Praxis After the Digital Turn,” South Atlantic Quarterly 114, no. 4 (October 1, 2015): 785.

15 Wilson et al., “Digital Critical Archives, Copyright, and Feminist Praxis,” 301.

16 Martijn van Otterlo, “Gatekeeping Algorithms with Human Ethical Bias: The Ethics of Algorithms in Archives, Libraries and Society,” 22-29, Cornell University, January 5, 2018, https://arxiv.org/abs/1801.01705.

17 Maya Jackson, “Artificial Intelligence & Algorithmic Bias: The Issues With Technology Reflecting History & Humans,” Journal of Business & Technology Law 16, no. 2 (2021): 300, 305.

18 Alexandra Ortolja-Baird and Julianne Nyhan, “Encoding the Haunting of an Object Catalogue: On the Potential of Digital Technologies to Perpetuate or Subvert the Silence and Bias of the Early-Modern Archive,” Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 37, no. 3 (August 23, 2022): 845.

19 Orolja-Baird and Nyhan, “Encoding the Haunting,” 847. See also Safiya Umoja Noble, Algorithms of Oppression: How Search Engines Reinforce Racism (New York: New York University Press, 2018).

20 Marika Cifor, “Stains and Remains: Liveliness, Materiality, and the Archival Lives of Queer Bodies,” Australian Feminist Studies 32, no. 91–92 (April 3, 2017): 18.

21 Swaby and Frank, “Archival Experiments, Notes and (Dis)Orientations,” 9; Marika Cifor and Anne J. Gilliland, “Affect and the Archive, Archives and Their Affects: An Introduction to the Special Issue,” Archival Science 16, no. 1 (March 2016): 2.

22 Marika Cifor, “Affecting Relations: Introducing Affect Theory to Archival Discourse,” Archival Science 16, no. 1 (March 2016): 14.

23 Cifor, “Affecting Relations,” 8-9; 18.

24 Cifor, “Affecting Relations,” 19.

25 Cifor, “Affecting Relations,” 22.

26 Keith Greenwood, “History Division Announces Inaugural Diversity Award Winner,” The History Division, June 6, 2019, https://mediahistorydivision.com/aejmc-history-division-announces-inaugural-diversity-award-winner/; Maddie Liseblad, “Award Call: Jinx C. Broussard Award for Excellence in the Teaching of Media History,” The History Division, January 23, 2023, https://mediahistorydivision.com/award-call-jinx-c-broussard-award-for-excellence-in-the-teaching-of-media-history-2/; Caitlin Cieslik-Miskimen, “Applications for Microgrants To Encourage Diverse Research Due Feb. 1,” The History Division, January 18, 2023, https://mediahistorydivision.com/applications-for-microgrants-to-encourage-diverse-research-due-feb-1/.

27 Tracy Lucht, “How Should AJHA Respond to Challenges Facing Our Field?” The History Division, December 20, 2022, https://ajha.wildapricot.org/Intelligencer/13031263.

28 Jamie A. Lee, “Archives as Spaces of Radical Hospitality,” Australian Feminist Studies 36, no. 108 (April 3, 2021): 157.

29 Patricia Hill Collins, “Learning from the Outsider Within: The Sociological Significance of Black Feminist Thought,” Social Problems 33, no. 6 (December 1986): S28.

30 Cifor, “Affecting Relations,” 12.

31 Freeman and Williams-Pulfer, “Liberating the Archive, Emancipating Philanthropy,” 1116–1117.

32 Freeman and Williams-Pulfer, “Liberating the Archive, Emancipating Philanthropy,” 1116–1117; Anthony W. Dunbar, “Introducing Critical Race Theory to Archival Discourse: Getting the Conversation Started,” Archival Science 6, no. 1 (October 31, 2006): 114; Dunbar, “Introducing Critical Race Theory,” 118.

33 Danielle Allard and Shawna Ferris, “Antiviolence and Marginalized Communities: Knowledge Creation, Community Mobilization, and Social Justice through a Participatory Archiving Approach,” Library Trends 64, no. 2 (2015): 364.

34 Koser, “Recovery and Obsolescence,” 197; Jacqueline Wernimont and Julia Flanders, “Feminism in the Age of Digital Archives: The Women Writers Project,” Tulsa Studies in Women’s Literature 29, no. 2 (Fall 2010): 427; Kate Eichhorn, “D.I.Y. Collectors, Archiving Scholars, and Activist Librarians: Legitimizing Feminist Knowledge and Cultural Production Since 1990,” Women’s Studies 39, no. 6 (July 27, 2010): 623.

35 Barbara Friedman, Carolyn Kitch, Therese Lueck, Amber Roessner, and Betty Winfield. “Stirred, Not Yet Shaken: Integrating Women’s History into Media History,” American Journalism 26, no. 1 (2009): 160–74, https://doi.org/10.1080/08821127.2009.10677706.

36 Allard and Ferris, “Antiviolence and Marginalized Communities,” 368, 373–374.

37 Holly A. Smith, “‘Wholeness Is No Trifling Matter’: Black Feminist Archival Practice and The Spelman College Archives,” The Black Scholar 52, no. 2 (April 3, 2022): 17.

38 Cifor, “Affecting Relations,” 13.

39 Eichhorn, “D.I.Y. Collectors, Archiving Scholars, and Activist Librarians,” 640.

40 Jessica M. Lapp, “‘The Only Way We Knew How’: Provenancial Fabulation in Archives of Feminist Materials,” Archival Science, November 9, 2021.

41 Hill Collins, “Learning from the Outsider Within,” S18.

42 Maria Cotera, “‘Invisibility Is an Unnatural Disaster’: Feminist Archival Praxis After the Digital Turn,” South Atlantic Quarterly 114, no. 4 (October 1, 2015): 785.

43 Swaby and Frank, “Archival Experiments, Notes and (Dis)Orientations,” 13.

44 Michelle Moravec, “Feminist Research Practices and Digital Archives,” Australian Feminist Studies 32, no. 91–92 (April 3, 2017): 187.

45 Cifor, “Affecting Relations,” 23.

46 Cifor, “Affecting Relations,” 26.

47 Maud Perrier and Deborah Withers, “An Archival Feminist Pedagogy: Unlearning and Objects as Affective Knowledge Companions,” Continuum 30, no. 3 (May 3, 2016): 361.

48 Hamilton and Spongberg, “Twenty Years On: Feminist Histories and Digital Media,” 674.

49 Swaby and Frank, “Archival Experiments, Notes and (Dis)Orientations,” 12.

50 Wilson et al., “Digital Critical Archives, Copyright, and Feminist Praxis,” 297.

51 Moravec, “Feminist Research Practices and Digital Archives,” 191.

52 Moravec, “Feminist Research Practices and Digital Archives,” 192.

53 Cifor, “Affecting Relations,” 12.

54 Ruth Pearce, “A Methodology for the Marginalised: Surviving Oppression and Traumatic Fieldwork in the Neoliberal Academy,” Sociology 54, no. 4 (August 2020): 809.

55 Pearce, “A Methodology for the Magrinalised,” 818.

56 Pearce, “A Methodology for the Magrinalised,” 820.

57 Allard and Ferris, “Antiviolence and Marginalized Communities,” 366 and 379.

58 Dunbar, “Introducing Critical Race Theory to Archival Discourse,” 116.

59 Lapp, “‘Handmaidens of History,’” 229.

60 Kimberlé Crenshaw, “Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence against Women of Color,” Stanford Law Review 43, no. 6 (July 1991).

61 Wernimont and Flanders, “Feminism in the Age of Digital Archives,” 427–429.

62 Wernimont and Flanders, “Feminism in the Age of Digital Archives,” 433.

63 Danielle Cooper, “Imagining Something Else Entirely: Metaphorical Archives in Feminist Theory,” Women’s Studies 45, no. 5 (July 3, 2016): 445.

64 Cooper, “Imagining Something Else Entirely,” 451.

65 Cooper, “Imagining Something Else Entirely,” 451, 453 and 447; Jenna Ashton, “Feminist Archiving [a Manifesto Continued]: Skilling for Activism and Organising,” Australian Feminist Studies 32, no. 91–92 (April 3, 2017): 127; Eichhorn, “D.I.Y. Collectors, Archiving Scholars, and Activist Librarians,” 626.

66 Cooper, “Imagining Something Else Entirely,” 453–454.

67 Koser, “Recovery and Obsolescence,” 200.

68 Tarez Samra Graban, “From Location(s) to Locatability: Mapping Feminist Recovery and Archival Activity through Metadata,” College English 76, no. 2 (2013): 173.

69 Allard and Ferris, “Antiviolence and Marginalized Communities,” 362.

70 Allard and Ferris, “Antiviolence and Marginalized Communities,” 363–366.

71 Allard and Ferris, “Antiviolence and Marginalized Communities,” 38–370.

72 Allard and Ferris, “Antiviolence and Marginalized Communities,” 374.

73 Sherry J. Katz, “‘Researching Around Our Subjects’: Excavating Radical Women,” Journal of Women’s History 20, no. 1 (2008): 178.

74 Judith Rosenbaum, “Archiving #MeToo: Past, Present, and Future,” American Jewish History 104, no. 2–3 (2020): 260.

75 Cooper, “Imagining Something Else Entirely,” 450.

76 Rebecca Solnit, Whose Story Is This? Old Conflicts, New Chapters (Chicago: Haymarket Books, 2019).

77 Will Mari, “A Shot in the Arm: A Call to Broaden, Deepen, and Diversify Media History.” American Journalism 40, no. 1 (January 2, 2023): 80–86, https://doi.org/10.1080/08821127.2023.2165577.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Bailey Dick

Bailey Dick is an Assistant Professor in the School of Media and Communication at Bowling Green State University. Her research examines the power of personal stories to disrupt systemic inequities and how women writers integrate their experiences with trauma in their work.