Beyond Journalism about Journalism: Amicus Briefs as Metajournalistic Discourse

Abstract

ABSTRACT There is a growing interest in journalism studies in metajournalistic discourse—that is, sites where journalists construct the boundaries and norms of their field. This study highlights a hitherto unstudied site of such discourse: the briefs of amicus curiae that news organizations file in U.S. appellate courts. While other forms of metajournalistic discourse seek to influence journalistic or public opinion, amicus briefs represent an attempt by journalists to influence judicial opinion and, consequently, the laws affecting U.S. journalism. Our analysis of 168 briefs finds that journalism amici employed a strategy that relied most heavily on several different variations of a discourse of inclusion, while a discourse of exclusion was used sparingly as an auxiliary to discourses of inclusion.