kentjourn
Professor Tim Luckhurst, head of the Centre for Journalism at the University of Kent, tells Journalism.co.uk why he believes journalism, as a subject for study, sits outside academia.

Professor Tim Luckhurst may lead a university journalism department but he scorns the notion of journalism or media studies.

Journalism can be taught at university-level, but this should be done vocationally, he says; for academic training, aspiring journalists should look to history, politics or law.

In Luckhurst's view, journalism is a trade, or better, a profession: "I tend to prefer the term profession. It's a profession practised by exceptionally educated people, who require rigorously trained analytical minds.

"I believe passionately that journalists need to know the history of modern Europe," he says. "I believe they need to know the history of political thought.

"I believe they need to understand the past in order to better understand the future. But I don't believe they get much of that from disciplines that call themselves media or journalism studies. I believe they get it from rigorous academic study."

Luckhurst, who studied history at Cambridge University in the 1980s, before becoming a journalist (after a brief period as a parliamentary press officer), says that he agree to lead the course at the University of Kent because it coupled vocational training with academic study.

The Centre for Journalism accepted its first intake of undergraduates in September 2008, so its alumni is yet to be founded. Students study elements of history, politics and law, simultaneously studying for the National Council for the Training of Journalists (NCTJ) examinations.

The department will expand again later this year, with a new multimedia journalism MA. The department, Luckhurst says, is in the business of "teaching incredibly intensive undergraduate degrees". Only one in ten undergraduate applicants are accepted, he says.

"I wanted very much to work for a university which would allow me to design a course in an inter-disciplinary way and that's what I've done."

Luckhurst - a former editor of the Scotsman and BBC journalist - wants to be clear that he's not dismissing academia across the board, in his criticism of journalism studies: "I have nothing but respect for research-active top academics." But, he adds, "I don't think there are many of them teaching media studies or journalism studies".

"I think the people who are relevant to the field in which I am proud to have spent my career, are the academic historians, political scientists and in some cases, philosophers and economists.

"I simply think we don't need to invent a new academic discipline. John Stuart Mill was writing about these things in 1859, he didn't call it media studies.

Journalism studies should be called "media sociology"
University journalism studies courses, Luckhurst claims, are not teaching you to be a journalist: "They are essentially teaching the sociology of the media [and are] entirely theoretical. They shouldn't call themselves journalism, they should call themselves media sociology."

Universities should sell courses for what they are, he says. "They are selling themselves with the allure of a career in journalism when they don't actually teach people anything which is relevant to that ambition."

Furthermore, Luckhurst has a problem with academics' "anti-journalist" stance - he believes some adopt a Marxist critique of journalism "which starts from the perspective that what is done for profit can't be virtuous".

He fiercely defends the tenets of the fourth estate and its place in democracy; he claims these have been dismissed as "fictitious virtues" in some academic quarters. 

Journalism academics can learn from journalists

Luckhurst argues that these journalism academics should look within the profession to develop their skills. 

In a recent review of a collection of essays on newspapers' future, Luckhurst argued that journalism academics "must learn from the new generation of multimedia reporters".

"To achieve impact in the online era, the study of journalism must embrace new working practices, just as it counsels journalists to change the habits of their lifetimes," he wrote.

He is clear, however, that journalism skills are worth studying at university-level, even though he never completed a journalism course himself.

"[It's] very nice – what I did – but much harder to do these days. The technical skills required of journalists have become more complex. The training in law has become more demanding. The number of jobs are fewer and in the end the number of traineeships are many many fewer.

"I was one of the very lucky generation. I could go and read history at Cambridge and then be trained by the BBC. The BBC paid me a good salary whilst it taught me law, and all of the things I needed to work as a journalist on the Today programme."

Big employers have no need to invest in this type of training he says, because people will pay to train themselves.

Luckhurst has designed a course he believes overcomes his concerns about journalism and the academe and he's not afraid to play it traditional.

On teaching entrepreneurial journalism, for example, he says that journalists have always had this spirit, particularly freelancers: "I'm one of those traditionalists who thinks teaching people to be entrepreneurial is about as plausible as teaching people to be physically attractive." 

While the fate of the first University of Kent journalism intake is yet to be seen, Luckhurst is clearly optimistic for them, as well as the profession's commercial future.

Free daily newsletter

If you like our news and feature articles, you can sign up to receive our free daily (Mon-Fri) email newsletter (mobile friendly).