Final Paper Assignment—A Short Research Paper

History Of the News—or History From the News

The Assignment

Your assignment is to write a short research paper, based upon a corpus of news sources before 2013. You might choose to write a research paper that explores how the press or media covered an event or a topic (history of the news). Or you might choose to write a research paper on a particular historical topic, by analyzing news sources (history from the news). I give you wide latitude to follow your own interests but I must approve your topic.

Some Guidelines

• Length: 8 to 12 pages paper (not including annotated bibliography)
• Include an annotated bibliography, separated into primary and secondary sources, with annotations
• Format & citations: follow the guidelines in the Sample Research Paper on Moodle. For citations, use Chicago-style footnotes with precise references, following the examples in Mary Lynn Rampolla as explained in the Sample Paper.

A Research Paper

The assignment is a research paper based on primary and secondary sources. Your paper must center upon an interesting historical question. You should demonstrate your mastery of a significant corpus of primary news sources. You should show a solid grasp of historical context. You should frame your paper within one or more important bodies of secondary sources, that is, your historiography, which should include the most important works by historians on your topic. Your paper should make a clear and interesting argument. You should include an annotated bibliography, separated into primary and secondary sources, with annotations.

Do not confuse this with a report. Your goal is not to summarize what historians have said about your topic—though you will surely do some of this in your paper. Nor is your goal to summarize what your primary sources say—though you will certainly do some of this in your paper. Your goal—the goal of historical research—is to develop your own argument about the topic at hand.

Your primary sources may be the subject of your paper (as in, for example, a paper on The London Times portrayal of the Spanish Civil War) or—be sure you recognize the difference here—they may be the evidence you use to address a particular historical topic (as in, for example, English attitudes toward homosexuality, as depicted in The London Times in the 1880s). I suggest focusing on news reports from a particular moment in time in a particular place, but you may prefer to examine news articles from two or more moments, or draw upon news sources from two places at a particular moment in time. Your primary news sources should represent a significant body of work, equivalent in length of 30 to 60 pages, something like W.T. Stead’s “Maiden Tribute” or Ida B. Wells’ Southern Horrors. Include your primary sources in the primary source section of your bibliography.

To understand historical context, you should look to reference sources and good secondary sources. For example, if you wrote a paper on news sources from Mexico in the late nineteenth century, you might draw upon reference works and our reading in Kovarik to put your primary sources into context. You might look to additional secondary sources to understand what was happening in Mexico at this time. Include these sources (reference sources, textbooks, monographs, articles) in the secondary source section of your bibliography.

You will use your secondary sources to frame your analysis. This is your historiography. You should certainly demonstrate your familiarity with the most important sources on your topic. For example, if you wrote about muckraking at the dawn of the twentieth century, you would want to lay out the views of Louis Filler, The Muckrakers (Stanford, 1993) and David Chalmers, The Social and Political Ideas of the Muckrakers (Citadel, 1964). At the same time, you might make use of one or more important theoretical works on the history of news. So, you might find it helpful to frame your analysis with reference to Schudson, Habermas, Herman & Chomsky, etc. The secondary source section of your bibliography should include about four to eight books and articles.

How to Develop a Topic

How to develop a topic? I’d suggest you start with some sources that interest you and some interesting questions. Or start with some interesting questions and look for sources that will help you answer them. Some examples (in no particular order):

• Pamphlet literature during the English Civil War. How did it mix the personal and the political?
• How did the New York Times report on the Wright Brothers in 1903?
• Who were the real “newsies” of turn-of-the-century New York? What were their lives like?
• Compare George Orwell’s account of the infighting during the Spanish Civil War to the reporting in the London Times.
• Mexican news pamphlets from the nineteenth century. How did they report foreign news?
• French pamphlets during the Revolutionary wars. How did they describe foreign powers?
• The English press in the 1850s. How did it report on the Sepoy mutiny of 1857?
• East German radio news from the 1950s. How did it report on the Soviet Union?
• How did the American press describe the rise of fascism in Italy in the 1920s?
• 18th century English newspapers. How did they describe national types, “the French,” “the Italians,” “the Russians,” etc.
• How did publishers understand their roles: As businessmen? Opinionmakers? The leaders of the Fourth Estate? Pick one publisher and look for key statements of purpose.
• Look at local Ohio newspapers in the 1830s. How well do they match Tocqueville’s description of the American press as the foundation of democracy?
• How was rugby covered in New Zealand newspapers in the 1930s?
• How did the Spanish press report on the memory of Francisco Franco?
• Compare Ida Wells’s account of lynchings to white newspapers account of the same events.
• How did American broadcasters treat Sen. Joseph McCarthy? How accurate is the picture from Good Night, and Good Luck?
• How did broadcast journalists understand their roles? How did they address the public?
To really get a good start you need: an interesting historical question and relevant primary sources.

Some Frequent Questions

How can I find a bit of background on my topic? Wikipedia is not enough, though there’s nothing wrong with starting here. I’ve suggested using the library’s online Reference Resources. Better still, you’d like to find authoritative texts that present the basic history behind your topic. Textbook histories can be very helpful. In a few pages, they will typically summarize events and comment on the most important historical interpretations.

Do I need to read every word of every work in my bibliography? No, not at all. You should be able to vouch for your mastery of your primary sources. These are your basic materials. But when it comes to the secondary sources, you may only know these works through a quick read of the introduction or a careful reading of a couple book reviews.

How should I organize my paper? There are many possibilities, but I’d suggest this as a model: 1) an introduction to the topic that draws in the reader, addresses how historians have approached the topic, points to your primary sources, and lays out your argument; 2) a section of historical context; 3-5) a series of 2 or 3 or 4 sections that develop your argument through the presentation and analysis of your primary sources; 6) a conclusion that addresses the so-what question.

Who is my audience? Write for an educated audience. You can imagine yourself writing for your fellow students in our class. You will need to provide some background for your topic and explain your sources before you analyze them. But don’t spend the vast majority of your paper summarizing historical context.

Can I write with the “I”? For formal papers, it is best to keep yourself in the background. The entire paper should express your point of view, but it should do so in general terms that will convince the reader by the force of your examples and your analysis. So, avoid phrases such as “I think,” “I feel,” “it seems to me,” “what interests me most.” By contrast, you may want to use phrases such as, “in this paper, I demonstrate,” “I show,” “I argue.”

What do I need to footnote? You will use your footnotes to provide precise citations for the source of details and arguments and quotations. But remember that you can also use footnotes to provide background (that you don’t want to include in your text) or to provide a general reference to the sources that you’ve used to come to a general understanding of your topic (eg, “For an introduction to Vichy France, I’ve relied most extensively on Robert Paxton, Vichy France: Old Guard, New Order…”).

Do I need to annotate my bibliography? Yes! This serves several purposes. It is your first on the work – and it is a guide for your readers. Give your sources short annotations. One or two sentences would be enough for us. For a primary source, briefly explain what source is about. For a secondary source, tell us who the author is and what the work is about.

How should I organize my bibliography? At a minimum you should divide your bibliography into a section for primary sources and a section for secondary sources. Think of your reader and make your bibliography a reference. It might make sense to organize your sources further (by individual newspaper, or by kind of source [newspapers, radio, television, etc]). You might want to order your primary sources chronologically rather than by author.

Criteria

• Have you developed an interesting topic with an interesting historical question and relevant primary sources?
• Do you have a strong annotated bibliography of relevant primary sources and important secondary sources?
• Do you show mastery of a significant corpus of primary news sources?
• Do you show a strong understanding of historical context?
• Do you frame your paper within a historiography—one or more important bodies of secondary sources (including the most important works on your topic)?
• Do you present a strong thesis?
• Do you deliver this thesis with well-chosen examples and strong analysis?
• Is it well organized (with a strong structure and well organized paragraphs)?
• Is it well written (in clear, precise, direct prose)?
• Is it free of small errors (of grammar, spelling, punctuation, format)?