Last year for Nieman Lab’s 2020 predictions, I received and published an auspicious article from the future — from the year 2073, to be exact.
After revealing that missive, I heard from many journalists and newsroom folk of today that the journalists in the future seem to have discovered inspired answers to many of the gnarly questions we’re grappling with now. They longed to live in that future reality. And the most exciting aspect for many was the idea of “power mapping.”
To summarize, here’s what the missive from the future says is going to happen: Some feminist cartographers (most of whom have yet to be born, not all of whom will identify as women) will generate a new visual language to help people quickly understand how power flows in any given system. They will develop an intuitive iconography that can be universally understood and applied, and which doesn’t require written or verbal language skills for the viewer to understand what’s happening and what power dynamics are at play.
Storytellers of all kinds in 2073, especially journalists, see this power lexicon as an indispensable and productive method to increase people’s interest in “the news” and to participate in shaping society. Why? Because it’s only when people understand the power dynamics of any given situation that they can shape how that situation resolves or evolves. Knowledge is power; maps are a knowledge format.
Over the course of this past year, I’ve been trying in a variety of mystical and mundane fashions to tap into and download more details about how this whole field of power fluency/power literacy comes to take shape.
The good news: I have some updates!
But to make it happen, newsrooms must start now to make power part of every storyline, to set the foundation for these cartographers to begin developing this language. I’m sorry to add that responsibility to all of your overflowing plates.
What I’ve been tasked to do is provide a few starting points for inspiration for you, dear reader, to begin experimenting with making power the central character and the animating force of your reporting. I hope this helps. <deep breath>
Eric Liu is a Taiwanese-American civic innovator, who started and runs an organization called Citizen University. He wrote a book in 2018 entitled You’re More Powerful Than You Think: A Citizen’s Guide to Making Change Happen. I have read and reread it, and bookmarked the page that outlines the three rules of power. Now that I know them, I see them at play everywhere.
My challenge to you is to consider the following: What would it take for these rules to become common knowledge? How might stories in the news call out which laws of power are at play?
With a solutions lens to reporting, how might journalists also share knowledge of where the leverage points are in the system? (This would no doubt help the public see what’s happening underneath the plotline of names and details, and give them a shorthand for doing their job as citizens in a democracy.)
What if every news story, no matter the form, helped people understand the foundational and systemic structures that are keeping things as is, creating conflict, or enabling new power to flow and, therefore, create new realities?
If journalism’s theory of change is that, by providing updates on “what’s happening,” people are enabled to form opinions and take action — wouldn’t revealing the storylines of power supercharge that ability?
How might newsrooms report equally on the power that already exists, to the infinite new power that’s being created? (E.g., who is starting to gather people, ideas and energy to do something differently?)
The book New Power: How Power Works In Our Interconnected World and How to Make it Work For You, by Jeremy Heimans and Henry Timms, is dedicated to unpacking how old/traditional forms of power differ from the types of new power made possible by this digitally connected world. The following two charts in the book show some of the key differences:
Old power values:
New power values:
Old power: Currency. New power: Current.
Old power: Held by few. New power: Made by many.
Old power: Download. New power: Upload.
Old power: Leader-driven. New power: Peer-driven.
Old power: Closed. New power: Open.
My challenge to you is to consider the following: What if every piece of journalism helped the public understand whether old or new power dynamics and values were at play? How might using this framing help generations better understand one another and why some approaches just will not work anymore?
What if reporters made explicit the values systems that are driving the sources in their stories to make the decisions they do? What might happen if newsrooms examined their own values, and whether they aligned more with old power or new power?
You may be familiar with the idea of “hard” and “soft” power. Soft power is the ability to use influence and attraction — rather than force, threat, or rules (hard power) — to make change happen.
You’ve definitely seen it at play in your life and work. That colleague of yours who doesn’t have a leadership title, but somehow manages to get their ideas heard and acted upon? They’re masters of soft power. That boss who gives orders and uses threats as their main way of making things happen? They use hard power as their instrument.
My challenge to you is to consider the following: What could it look like if every news story explained the soft and hard powers at play?
How would our journalistic narratives around gender change if we paid more attention to soft power, and the advantages it has in uniting and bringing people along with change? (Note: Many people who do not identify as women excel at soft power, so don’t reduce hard and soft power to the sex or gender identity of a person.)
How useful would it have been to understand the 2020 election through the lens of soft and hard power? At one point or another, we all wondered: Is he actually allowed to do that? Having an explanation of hard power would have helped people make sense of, and perhaps ease some anxieties about the many ways things could unfold.
In short, there will be a plethora of formats. The maps may show up as a sidebar in a story that names the players and gives bullet points on the types and qualities of the power at play. There will be “layers” you can turn on in a story to see the chronological poetry of power-shifting playing out over some period of time.
There will arise a handful of common patterns — shapes of power — that are used to give a shorthand visual for the dynamics at play. And, of course, there will be videos that accompany stories that give people the simplified overview of where power is being exerted, where it’s stuck, and what the outcomes are.
That’s all I know for now — and I’m excited to see what you visual thinkers come up with.
Humans are, of course, storytelling animals. When see a pattern, we unconsciously lock into it and then jump to conclusions in an effort to minimize confusion and maximize sense. This proclivity is a nuance-killer, a compassion-stripper, a destroyer of the ability to hold two competing narratives in one’s head simultaneously and recognize when a false dichotomy is at play.
In short: Power maps can also be dangerous.
What do I mean? Take a brief 1:32 to watch this video produced by two researchers, Heider and Simmel, in the 1940s.
What did you see? Was this a story of abuse? Was this a love triangle narrative? Or some kind of alien invasion? Reasonable people can and will disagree. They will locate a pattern and depending on their life experience, and skip straight to one of a handful of conclusions. (Credit here to the brilliant scholar and writer Jonathan Gottschall for giving this talk that inspired these realizations.)
Okay — so then what? We need to be sure we make power maps editable and iterative. Power, like the stuff that flows through our home’s electric circuits, is not static. These visualizations and explanations must be positioned as a snapshot in time and not a marker of the current reality. They should come with an expiration date and be able to be updated over time when dynamics shift.
And just as we fact-check stories (or at least one hopes we do), and just as we give people an opportunity to share their side of the story (or at least one hopes we do), reporters and fact-checkers are going to need to share their power maps with the folks they involve to be sure there’s a common reality to work from. And if there’s not, they’ll need to be prepared for people to create multiple versions and multiple POVs of any given map.
As I said in last year’s prediction, power maps will take time to develop. Which means there’s a lot of cultural cleanup to do between now and then in order to re-establish some semblance of a shared set of facts and a shared reality. And starting to shine a light on power, I’m told, will be a critically important part of enabling that change and healing.
Jennifer Brandel is co-founder and senior vice president of global partnerships at Hearken.
Last year for Nieman Lab’s 2020 predictions, I received and published an auspicious article from the future — from the year 2073, to be exact.
After revealing that missive, I heard from many journalists and newsroom folk of today that the journalists in the future seem to have discovered inspired answers to many of the gnarly questions we’re grappling with now. They longed to live in that future reality. And the most exciting aspect for many was the idea of “power mapping.”
To summarize, here’s what the missive from the future says is going to happen: Some feminist cartographers (most of whom have yet to be born, not all of whom will identify as women) will generate a new visual language to help people quickly understand how power flows in any given system. They will develop an intuitive iconography that can be universally understood and applied, and which doesn’t require written or verbal language skills for the viewer to understand what’s happening and what power dynamics are at play.
Storytellers of all kinds in 2073, especially journalists, see this power lexicon as an indispensable and productive method to increase people’s interest in “the news” and to participate in shaping society. Why? Because it’s only when people understand the power dynamics of any given situation that they can shape how that situation resolves or evolves. Knowledge is power; maps are a knowledge format.
Over the course of this past year, I’ve been trying in a variety of mystical and mundane fashions to tap into and download more details about how this whole field of power fluency/power literacy comes to take shape.
The good news: I have some updates!
But to make it happen, newsrooms must start now to make power part of every storyline, to set the foundation for these cartographers to begin developing this language. I’m sorry to add that responsibility to all of your overflowing plates.
What I’ve been tasked to do is provide a few starting points for inspiration for you, dear reader, to begin experimenting with making power the central character and the animating force of your reporting. I hope this helps. <deep breath>
Eric Liu is a Taiwanese-American civic innovator, who started and runs an organization called Citizen University. He wrote a book in 2018 entitled You’re More Powerful Than You Think: A Citizen’s Guide to Making Change Happen. I have read and reread it, and bookmarked the page that outlines the three rules of power. Now that I know them, I see them at play everywhere.
My challenge to you is to consider the following: What would it take for these rules to become common knowledge? How might stories in the news call out which laws of power are at play?
With a solutions lens to reporting, how might journalists also share knowledge of where the leverage points are in the system? (This would no doubt help the public see what’s happening underneath the plotline of names and details, and give them a shorthand for doing their job as citizens in a democracy.)
What if every news story, no matter the form, helped people understand the foundational and systemic structures that are keeping things as is, creating conflict, or enabling new power to flow and, therefore, create new realities?
If journalism’s theory of change is that, by providing updates on “what’s happening,” people are enabled to form opinions and take action — wouldn’t revealing the storylines of power supercharge that ability?
How might newsrooms report equally on the power that already exists, to the infinite new power that’s being created? (E.g., who is starting to gather people, ideas and energy to do something differently?)
The book New Power: How Power Works In Our Interconnected World and How to Make it Work For You, by Jeremy Heimans and Henry Timms, is dedicated to unpacking how old/traditional forms of power differ from the types of new power made possible by this digitally connected world. The following two charts in the book show some of the key differences:
Old power values:
New power values:
Old power: Currency. New power: Current.
Old power: Held by few. New power: Made by many.
Old power: Download. New power: Upload.
Old power: Leader-driven. New power: Peer-driven.
Old power: Closed. New power: Open.
My challenge to you is to consider the following: What if every piece of journalism helped the public understand whether old or new power dynamics and values were at play? How might using this framing help generations better understand one another and why some approaches just will not work anymore?
What if reporters made explicit the values systems that are driving the sources in their stories to make the decisions they do? What might happen if newsrooms examined their own values, and whether they aligned more with old power or new power?
You may be familiar with the idea of “hard” and “soft” power. Soft power is the ability to use influence and attraction — rather than force, threat, or rules (hard power) — to make change happen.
You’ve definitely seen it at play in your life and work. That colleague of yours who doesn’t have a leadership title, but somehow manages to get their ideas heard and acted upon? They’re masters of soft power. That boss who gives orders and uses threats as their main way of making things happen? They use hard power as their instrument.
My challenge to you is to consider the following: What could it look like if every news story explained the soft and hard powers at play?
How would our journalistic narratives around gender change if we paid more attention to soft power, and the advantages it has in uniting and bringing people along with change? (Note: Many people who do not identify as women excel at soft power, so don’t reduce hard and soft power to the sex or gender identity of a person.)
How useful would it have been to understand the 2020 election through the lens of soft and hard power? At one point or another, we all wondered: Is he actually allowed to do that? Having an explanation of hard power would have helped people make sense of, and perhaps ease some anxieties about the many ways things could unfold.
In short, there will be a plethora of formats. The maps may show up as a sidebar in a story that names the players and gives bullet points on the types and qualities of the power at play. There will be “layers” you can turn on in a story to see the chronological poetry of power-shifting playing out over some period of time.
There will arise a handful of common patterns — shapes of power — that are used to give a shorthand visual for the dynamics at play. And, of course, there will be videos that accompany stories that give people the simplified overview of where power is being exerted, where it’s stuck, and what the outcomes are.
That’s all I know for now — and I’m excited to see what you visual thinkers come up with.
Humans are, of course, storytelling animals. When see a pattern, we unconsciously lock into it and then jump to conclusions in an effort to minimize confusion and maximize sense. This proclivity is a nuance-killer, a compassion-stripper, a destroyer of the ability to hold two competing narratives in one’s head simultaneously and recognize when a false dichotomy is at play.
In short: Power maps can also be dangerous.
What do I mean? Take a brief 1:32 to watch this video produced by two researchers, Heider and Simmel, in the 1940s.
What did you see? Was this a story of abuse? Was this a love triangle narrative? Or some kind of alien invasion? Reasonable people can and will disagree. They will locate a pattern and depending on their life experience, and skip straight to one of a handful of conclusions. (Credit here to the brilliant scholar and writer Jonathan Gottschall for giving this talk that inspired these realizations.)
Okay — so then what? We need to be sure we make power maps editable and iterative. Power, like the stuff that flows through our home’s electric circuits, is not static. These visualizations and explanations must be positioned as a snapshot in time and not a marker of the current reality. They should come with an expiration date and be able to be updated over time when dynamics shift.
And just as we fact-check stories (or at least one hopes we do), and just as we give people an opportunity to share their side of the story (or at least one hopes we do), reporters and fact-checkers are going to need to share their power maps with the folks they involve to be sure there’s a common reality to work from. And if there’s not, they’ll need to be prepared for people to create multiple versions and multiple POVs of any given map.
As I said in last year’s prediction, power maps will take time to develop. Which means there’s a lot of cultural cleanup to do between now and then in order to re-establish some semblance of a shared set of facts and a shared reality. And starting to shine a light on power, I’m told, will be a critically important part of enabling that change and healing.
Jennifer Brandel is co-founder and senior vice president of global partnerships at Hearken.
Chicas Poderosas More voices mean better information
Jessica Clark News becomes plural
Amara Aguilar Journalism schools emphasize listening
Gonzalo del Peon Collaborations expand from newsrooms to the business side
Alfred Hermida and Oscar Westlund The virus ups data journalism’s game
Janet Haven and Sam Hinds Is this an AI newsroom?
Sonali Prasad Making disaster journalism that cuts through the noise
Colleen Shalby The definition of good journalism shifts
Kawandeep Virdee Goodbye, doomscroll
Doris Truong Indigenous issues get long-overdue mainstream coverage
Shaydanay Urbani and Nancy Watzman Local collaboration is key to slowing misinformation
Patrick Butler Covid-19 reporting has prepared us for cross-border collaboration
Burt Herman Journalists build post-Facebook digital communities
Ben Werdmuller The web blooms again
Imaeyen Ibanga Journalism gets unmasked
Chase Davis The year we look beyond The Story
Julia Angwin Show your (computational) work
Nabiha Syed Newsrooms quit their toxic relationships
Jonas Kaiser Toward a wehrhafte journalism
Mandy Jenkins You build trust by helping your readers
Eric Nuzum Podcasting dodged a bullet in 2020, but 2021 will be harder
Talmon Joseph Smith The media rejects deficit hawkery
Zizi Papacharissi The year we rebuild the infrastructure of truth
Heidi Tworek A year of news mocktails
Linda Solomon Wood Canada steps up for journalism
Tim Carmody Spotify will make big waves in video
Joni Deutsch Local arts and music make journalism more joyous
Julia B. Chan and Kim Bui Millennials are ready to run things
Bo Hee Kim Newsrooms create an intentional and collaborative culture
Juleyka Lantigua The download, podcasting’s metric king, gets dethroned
Rick Berke Virtual events are here to stay
Mark S. Luckie Newsrooms and streaming services get cozy
Jennifer Brandel A sneak peak at power mapping, 2073’s top innovation
Anna Nirmala Local news orgs grasp the urgency of community roots
Tanya Cordrey Declining trust forces publishers to claim (or disclaim) values
Sue Cross A global consensus around the kind of news we need to save
Rachel Schallom The rise of nonprofit journalism continues
Cindy Royal J-school grads maintain their optimism and adaptability
Raney Aronson-Rath To get past information divides, we need to understand them first
Zainab Khan From understanding to feeling
Masuma Ahuja We’ll remember how interconnected our world is
Rishad Patel From direct-to-consumer to direct-to-believers
Astead W. Herndon The Trump-sized window of the media caring about race closes again
Jennifer Choi What have we done for you lately?
Francesca Tripodi Don’t expect breaking up Google and Facebook to solve our information woes
Ariel Zirulnick Local newsrooms question their paywalls
Moreno Cruz Osório In Brazil, a push for pluralism
J. Siguru Wahutu Journalists still wrongly think the U.S. is different
John Saroff Covid sparks the growth of independent local news sites
Mike Ananny Toward better tech journalism
Ashton Lattimore Remote work helps level the playing field in an insular industry
Kristen Muller Engaged journalism scales
Nico Gendron Ask your readers to help build your products
Hossein Derakhshan Mass personalization of truth
Whitney Phillips Facts are an insufficient response to falsehoods
Cherian George Enter the lamb warriors
Mariano Blejman It’s time to challenge autocompleted journalism
Renée Kaplan Falling in love with your subscription
Meredith D. Clark The year journalism starts paying reparations
Errin Haines Let’s normalize women’s leadership
Nisha Chittal The year we stop pivoting
Andrew Ramsammy Stop being polite and start getting real
Richard Tofel Less on politics, more on how government works (or doesn’t)
Christoph Mergerson Black Americans will demand more from journalism
Gordon Crovitz Common law will finally apply to the Internet
M. Scott Havens Traditional pay TV will embrace the disruption
Anthony Nadler Journalism struggles to find a new model of legitimacy
Jeremy Gilbert Human-centered journalism
Nicholas Jackson Blogging is back, but better
Robert Hernandez Data and shame
A.J. Bauer The year of MAGAcal thinking
José Zamora Walking the talk on diversity
Sumi Aggarwal News literacy programs aren’t child’s play
Tauhid Chappell and Mike Rispoli Defund the crime beat
Loretta Chao Open up the profession
Victor Pickard The commercial era for local journalism is over
Ray Soto The news gets spatial
Tamar Charney Public radio has a midlife crisis
Jody Brannon People won’t renew
Laura E. Davis The focus turns to newsroom leaders for lasting change
Ben Collins We need to learn how to talk to (and about) accidental conspiracists
C.W. Anderson Journalism changed under Trump — will it keep changing under Biden?
Bill Adair The future of fact-checking is all about structured data
Ståle Grut Network analysis enters the journalism toolbox
Megan McCarthy Readers embrace a low-information diet
Cory Bergman The year after a thousand earthquakes
An Xiao Mina 2020 isn’t a black swan — it’s a yellow canary
Candis Callison Calling it a crisis isn’t enough (if it ever was)
Joanne McNeil Newsrooms push back against Ivy League cronyism
Matt Skibinski Misinformation won’t stop unless we stop it
Hadjar Benmiloud Get representative, or die trying
Rachel Glickhouse Journalists will be kinder to each other — and to themselves
Rodney Gibbs Zooming beyond talking heads
Logan Jaffe History as a reporting tool
Ariane Bernard Going solo is still only a path for the few
María Sánchez Díez Traffic will plummet — and it’ll be ok
Gabe Schneider Another year of empty promises on diversity
Benjamin Toff Beltway reporting gets normal again, for better and for worse
Jacqué Palmer The rise of the plain-text email newsletter
Garance Franke-Ruta Rebundling content, rebuilding connections
Marissa Evans Putting community trauma into context
Marcus Mabry News orgs adapt to a post-Trump world (with Trump still in it)
Celeste Headlee The rise of radical newsroom transparency
Andrew Donohue The rise of the democracy beat
Jean Friedman-Rudovsky and Cassie Haynes A shift from conversation to action
Brandy Zadrozny Misinformation fatigue sets in
Pia Frey Building growth through tastemakers and their communities
Don Day Business first, journalism second
Sarah Stonbely Videoconferencing brings more geographic diversity
Sam Ford We’ll find better ways to archive our work
Jer Thorp Fewer pixels, more cardboard
Marie Shanahan Journalism schools stop perpetuating the status quo
Francesco Zaffarano The year we ask the audience what it needs
Aaron Foley Diversity gains haven’t shown up in local news
Ryan Kellett The bundle gets bundled
Charo Henríquez A new path to leadership
John Davidow Reflect and repent
Ernie Smith Entrepreneurship on rails
David Skok A pandemic-prompted wave of consolidation
Danielle C. Belton A decimated media rededicates itself to truth
Samantha Ragland The year of journalists taking initiative
Mark Stenberg The rise of the journalist-influencer
Parker Molloy The press will risk elevating a Shadow President Trump
Edward Roussel Tech companies get aggressive in local
Rasmus Kleis Nielsen Stop pretending publishers are a united front
John Garrett A surprisingly good year
Taylor Lorenz Journalists will learn influencing isn’t easy
Alicia Bell and Simon Galperin Media reparations now
Nikki Usher Don’t expect an antitrust dividend for the media
David Chavern Local video finally gets momentum
Kevin D. Grant Parachute journalism goes away for good
John Ketchum More journalists of color become newsroom founders
Stefanie Murray and Anthony Advincula Expect to see more translations and non-English content
Kate Myers My son will join every Zoom call in our industry
Michael W. Wagner Fractured democracy, fractured journalism
Kerri Hoffman Protecting podcasting’s open ecosystem
Sara M. Watson Return of the RSS reader
Matt DeRienzo Citizen truth brigades steer us back toward reality
Mike Caulfield 2021’s misinformation will look a lot like 2020’s (and 2019’s, and…)
Jesse Holcomb Genre erosion in nonprofit journalism
Brian Moritz The year sports journalism changes for good
Alyssa Zeisler Holistic medicine for journalism
Steve Henn Has independent podcasting peaked?
Pablo Boczkowski Audiences have revolted. Will newsrooms adapt?
Nonny de la Pena News reaches the third dimension
Tonya Mosley True equity means ownership
Sarah Marshall The year audiences need extra cheer
Annie Rudd Newsrooms grow less comfortable with the “view from above”
Joshua P. Darr Legislatures will tackle the local news crisis
Catalina Albeanu Publish less, listen more
Delia Cai Subscriptions start working for the middle
Jim Friedlich A newspaper renaissance reached by stopping the presses