.png)
Melinda McClure Haughey, PhD
In moments of uncertainty, journalists help the public make sense. This research shows how that work depends on expert networks and systems that too often fail when they need to move fast and what it would take to make them more responsive.
The modern, networked information environment enables public attention to converge and intensify quickly during high-stakes news moments. Sometimes, this attention is expected, as in elections; other times, it emerges suddenly, sparked by violence, leaks, protests, or when local developments escalate into national stories. In periods of heightened uncertainty, both directly affected individuals and ambient observers strive to make sense of unfolding developments while searching for plausible explanations. In this interpretive scramble, rumors and misleading frames can emerge and solidify within hours or days, sometimes in the absence of timely, credible information.
Journalists have long assisted the public in interpreting complex, contested realities in their role as explainers and annotators—a role increasingly vital as people face an overwhelming volume and speed of information. To fulfill this role, journalists must "truth-seek", or make sense of events themselves. Yet, as this dissertation shows, access to experts—an efficient and valuable information source—and the systems supporting that access are patchwork, unevenly distributed, and break down with the demands of real-time reporting. These constraints widen the gap between public demand for information and journalists’ ability to provide timely interpretation to the public, especially for journalists with limited resources and amid industry strain.
Drawing on qualitative methods—including ethnography, interviews, and participant observation—I present three studies that examine the sociotechnical and professional dynamics of journalist–expert collaboration during high-stakes news moments in the United States, including two contested presidential elections and other high-attention events such as public health crises, social justice protests, and moments of platform accountability and political violence.
Finally, I offer a conceptual contribution by articulating journalist–expert networks as part of the broader public sensemaking process and as a form of infrastructure: critical yet fragmented networks, tools, and routines that become visible in moments of strain—strain that emerges where high-stakes news events intersect with the demands of today’s networked information environment. This reframing offers both a conceptual shift and a normative claim: if journalists serve the the public by providing interpretation at speed, then improving access to expert knowledge during high-stakes news moment deserves attention, support, resourcing, and design—early provocations for which are offered as both a framework and a call to action in the final chapter of this dissertation.