2.2 Research MethodologySecondary Research Method has been used to prepare the project critique of the Journal. To compare the results and technique, previous researches answering similar research questions have been kept into consideration. To further evaluate the result and its accountability, textual references have been used. Scientific books and journals describing the most suitable research methods have worked as a base to evaluating the methodology. Therefore, narrative analysis approach has also been utilized 3. Analysis of the JournalThe project paper is analyzing the Journal by dividing into three segments – Research Analysis, Theoretical Analysis and Methodological Analysis. In the coming chapter, the project paper first reflects the methods taken in consideration by the author followed by the analysis of the same. 3.1 Research Analysis This segment analyses the research objective, research question and scope of the paper.3.1.1 Research ObjectiveThe objective of the Journal is to gather pre-elementary research so as to find solution to the specified research question. Leedy defines research as ‘a procedure by which we attempt to find systematically, and with the support of demonstrable fact, the answer to a question or the resolution of a problem. (1989, p. 5)’. Therefore, it is important to define a clear, stated objective so as to carry forward a successful design of research style. The accurate problem establishment is the first and most important part of kick-starting a research.In the Journal, the objectives defined are concise in relation to the one major issue i.e accountability of online media. Throughout the authors strive to find a solution in terms of the degree of accountability that is held by media and related factors that imply the European Media Policies.3.1.2 Research QuestionsThe main research question of the journal is to connect the bridge of Online Media Accountability Practices and their Implications for European Media Policy. Few other research questions (Eberwein,Porlezza, 2014) that are being tackled in the journal are :• The effectiveness of the non-state means of making the media responsible as opposed to state controlled instruments of media regulations?• Participatory media accountability processes on the Internet a serious alternative to conventional regulatory approaches?• Difference in Journalism culture within Europe and beyond.• Implication’s for European Media Policy makers.The research question in the field of mass media researches should be of social relevance and historical awareness resulting in providing a social scientific way of bringing a powerful change in the society. (Murdock,2002). The journal aims of contributing to journalistic quality management through their work, in result, trying to provide a positive change in the society. The research question also looks ‘to close some gaps with regards to the accountability practices in the online realm.’ Therefore, it can be termed as a socially applicable journal paper which can be expected to bring a change in the social systems of the journalistic fragments of the society, further also providing implications for policy revolutions in the European Media (Eberwein,Porlezza, 2014).3.1.3 Scope of the PaperPost elaborating on the research questions and major objectives of the Journal, there is a need to understand the scope of the paper and how can it be geographically validated. There has been a wide range of European media systems examined in the paper. Western Media Systems in a diverse range along with Eastern European Media system in different phases of political transformation. To give a much-diversed appeal to the research, two Arab states have also been considered who comparatively tend to have limited experience with press freedom. Since the paper keeps into consideration a comparison in the media scenario of European nations with other country, therefore the scope of the paper could be defined as multidisciplinary and international. Thus, this makes the paper to be interpreted in much larger section of the world. It makes the findings and conclusions of the paper to be of relevance in a more diverse society. 3.2 Theoretical AnalysisThis segment of the project paper analyses the literature review done by the authors also highlighting its importance. 3.2.1 Literature Analysis”The Literature Review is the springboard to the whole research.” Analyzing the already existing data pool is of utmost importance. In the Journal, the authors have taken considerate amount of research and literature to back up their steps taken in the process of coming to a solution for the research problem. The topic of research has been supported with relevant information about the theories with regards with Journalism, Accountability and Social Systems. These three mentioned subjects are of key importance in the project in various steps of research. Further, the literature review also analyses the concept of ‘Media Transparency’, deriving direct conclusions from various theories used which provides a step ahead in the research. The Journal provides a clear understanding of the media practices & laws and theories underlying their relevance. Though, even after considerate steps, the Journal lacks in enough amount of theoretical support for the research. The major literature deals with observatory and analyzing segmentation for the final conclusions but not enough theoretical reference to support the research. As per David Hemmings Pritchard, “Media accountability is fragmented, informal and diverse; therefore, the research required to judge the degree of the same has to be oriented to give a disfigured subject a theoretical proof.” (Pritchard, 2000)3.3 Methodological AnalysisThis segment of the paper analyses the methodological approach considered by the author, it focuses on highlighting the available alternative options for the research method, data collection and data sampling. It also covers the pros and cons of the extensive pre-study done prior to the research. 3.3.1 Research Method and Data CollectionResearch is not primarily about gathering the data, but choosing the right methodology for addressing the research questions (Bryman,2016). The journal has chosen an extensive methodological approach to derive to the conclusion. The authors decided to chose a Mixed Research Method. ‘The term “mixed methods” refers to an emergent methodology of research that advances the systematic integration, or “mixing,” of quantitative and qualitative data within a single investigation or sustained program of inquiry’. The Mixed Method used in the Journal could be defined as the Exploratory Sequential Mixed Method Design. (Bryman, 2016). A content analysis of ‘innovative instruments of media observation’ such as citizen blogs, cyber-ombudspersons or media criticism via social media platform was held in order to form a deeper understanding of the accountability and transparency. The content analysis was followed by the survey that was conducted online with the help of the EFS Survey software which has a cost effective and flexible configuration with an easy distribution options. The Journal holds a strong position in balancing the data collection methods, but the method of mixed study, requires increased resources which the author was able to redefine and regulate them by using the more flexible way of data collection in both the segments of Qualitative and quantitative collection. The different conclusions of the qualitative and quantitative collection of data methods could be threatening to the reputation of the reliability of the Journal conclusions. The authors have given the responsibility of paving and forming a base for the further survey to the interview held at the prior stage. The survey was conducted online with the help of the EFS Survey software which was a cost effective and flexible configuration and distribution of the survey. The research team was managed and supervised under a German Project Management guaranteeing a high standard of data administration and collection at all levels. Thus, outsourcing data collection could be an advantage or disadvantage for the research. This could either make them feel not as much involved and updated about the collection process. It could also serve as an advantage as it would make the researchers to pay more attention in the analysing part of the Journal. This therefore makes the relationship of analysing and conclusions for the research not as much related. Data collection is at a questionable position. 3.3.2 Data Sampling The Researchers calculated the sample size in a very accurate format. The response behaviour in the pre-test was determined to find an estimated standard error 0.05. Thus, calculating the sample size to 1,782. Using the calculated sample size, it was then forwarded and further balanced in accordance with the countries chosen, and divided as per their population. The journalists were invited to be a part of the survey on a random sampling basis. The contact was made using the disposable address database, and the participant participated in the survey over emails. The response rate of the survey was 23% which as per the research of ‘The Adequacy of Response Rate to Online and Paper Surveys: What Can Be Done?’ one of the most expected rate of response making data collection a successful step of the research. (Eberwein,Porlezza, 2014)Random Sampling may not provide as accurate results as Specified Sampling. There is a possibility that the journalists chosen to part of the survey may not be an accurate match for the topic of research. An alternate method that could have been used by the author to determine the samples for the survey participation could be by approaching media houses in the respective countries and then further sorting the samples. It is also possible that the survey participants may only be reporting one ‘beat’ of news, this will thus not be accurate enough to determine their responses for the research question. It is therefore necessary to uphold a sample size serving the varied genres of news reporting in order to have a varied mind-set while being the part of the research. Thus, the reliability of the sample size is questionable, making the conclusions on the report a bit dicey too. 3.3.3 Pre-StudyFor the pre-study, the theoretical foundation of the project was based on interviewing 98 professionals. ‘The experts were interviewed about the prevalence and possibilities of web based media accountability processes.’ This was expected to give the researchers a better insight into the research problem. The pre-study also helped in evaluation of the actual sample size for the final research. Apparently, the decision of pre-study could be mentioned as a very rightful one for the research.It is a matter of question that the pre-study was done in an interview format. Therefore, the problem of researcher being bias could affect the result. The journal doesn’t explain the criteria kept in mind before preparing for the pre-study. There are few steps that are to be taken care of when an interview input is generated within a conversational dialogue. Due to the absence of the data, it is not reliable to judge the output and results of the interviews held for pre-study. During the interview phase, the research formulated the ‘methodological agenda and developed equivalent instruments’ for the research. The structure of the pre-study interviews is unknown to form an opinion about their reliability. Therefore, it won’t be wrong if the Pre-Study is defined as the base of the study. If the base is questionable and may have a bias attached to the same, it 3.4 Research Result3.4.1 Research DiscussionAfter defining the research problem, formulating the rigorous pre-study, partial content analyzing and the survey, the authors provide a tabular format of the surveyed question. The scale of measurement used by the author is Likert Scale. ‘The investigation of attitudes is much survey research’ (Bryman, 2016). The scale helped in measuring the intensity of emotions and feeling towards a particular subject. One series of statement could be used to conclude various results. It helps in measurement of attitudes. (Bryman,2016) It is one of the most apt one to be used for the survey of this research since the main focus of the Journal is to analyze the attitude of Journalist to determine the degree of media accountability.3.4.2 Limitations of the PaperSince the result of the paper is determined by the survey with same questions being distributed in across fourteen countries i.e. United Kingdom, Netherlands, Germany, Switzerland, Austria, Finland, Italy, France, Spain, Estonia, Poland, Romania, Jordan and Tunisia. As mentioned by researchers, they have devised this separation of systems of these countries into- ‘Polarized Pluralists’, ‘Liberal’, ‘Democratic Corporatist’, they have their own political transformation. (Eberwein,Porlezza, 2014) The intention of the researcher was to develop a “Most Different System Design” in order to develop different populations. But the difference could be seen in their result. The degree of press laws, influence of the corporate entities on media, history of media freedom in all the selected countries are different. This gives a different mind set This will thus create extreme results for various answers. Thus, making it difficult to find a solution to the research problem. Having extreme opinion about the research issue i.e. Online Media Accountability Practices will thus give a very scattered result with extreme answers to the survey. The Journal only has three questions devised and explained, while trying to access the full question of survey, the access wasn’t found. This provides an inaccurate guide into the research problem making it a non viable source to judge the research problem and its solutions from.The authors have mentioned that they faced the ‘problem of equivalence’ in various steps of the research irrespective of the thematic focus provided throughout. (Eberwein,Porlezza, 2014)• Construct Equivalence – The difficulty that the authors might face while introducing the population of participant to the subject of research. It will be a hindrance for the authors since it may not be an issue of utmost knowledge to all the subjects involved.• Method Equivalence – The difficulty to perceive the identical quality of data for the research from all the selected nations could be another issue faced by the authors. Every country has their own social rights, internet laws which could create a problem in collection of the data.• Administrative Equivalence- The authors must be sure about the realization of data that is been collected from variable countries. For a reliable result, it is necessary to have a standard realization among all the countries. • Instrument Equivalence – The instruments used for the research (i.e Surveys) must be congruent for all the multi-nationalities they are being used for. • Equivalence of Analyzed Population, samples and period of inquiry This could also be termed as one of the major limitation of this paper.4. ConclusionThe critiqued journal of the project paper provides high degree of reliability. Throughout the empirical research, the authors used a much supportive base for every step taken during the research. The Journal has explained and justified the choices of methodology so as it makes it easy and understandable by a layman. A clearly defined goal and objective of the paper provides the readers a much extensive dig in into the research, not just in consideration of the results, but also while keeping the methodological approach in mind. The reasoning of the usage of a particular way of analyzing over the other helps in understanding the mindset of the author by giving a clear view to the readers. The literature review and theoretical understanding of the project paper is at a weak position. Compensating for the same, the researchers covered up in the pre-study by interviewing about 98 people. The digital advancement could be witnessed in usage of reliable software providing close to accurate responses from the surveyed sample size. The researchers also used the right methods to define the sample size. But, the response rate of twenty-three percent gives a doubtful approach in mind.The research question involves the Online Media Accountability, therefore the lack of ‘Content-Analysis’ of social media platforms makes the paper lack a perspective Social Media is one of the most accessed medium for news access, therefore a content analysis of the same would have helped the expansion of research into a much wider scale.Laudan (1968) in his historical survey of scientific method:As per Laudan ‘Perhaps the most serious inhibition to the emergence of the history of theories of scientific method as a respectable area of study has been the tendency to conflate it with the general history of epistemology, thereby assuming that the narrative categories and classificatory pigeon-holes applied to the latter are also basic to the former.’ (1968: 5)Scientific research gives a reliable conclusion to question. In conclusion, the research by authors have done justification to the subject topic. If some more were paid attention, the result come out could have been a more descriptive one. But the main purpose of the study has been fulfilled by giving a reliable answer to the main matter of concern making it a satisfactory accomplishment. 5. Future Suggestions for the research Though the research has been concluded to be apt in consideration with the research questions, there is always a room for innovation and growth. To improve the Journal scope, the following steps could be taken: 1. Increasing the scope to Scandinavia – Scandinavia is an integral part of European Union, therefore a research while keeping it under consideration may form a wrong result of the continent. The Journal holds only one Scandinavian country i.e. Finland. The existence of Finland in Scandinavia is also questionable. To increase the scope and reliability, the research could be extended by adding another of such country. This would give a perfect reflection of Europe as a whole2. Comparative Research: With addition of another Scandinavian nation, the research could be used to analyze the differentiated opinion of Online Media Accountability among various European segments. This could give a more comparative outlook on the same. With such analyses, this could help come to a more better conclusion with regards to its influence of European Media Policies. 3. Content Analysis: The importance of Social Media on Online Accountability is a questionable topic and yet not been explored as such. If, this research method is included analyses of the various social media handles of the surveyed/interviewed reporters, it would have given a more detailed outcome of the report to the actual thought process (keeping in mind questions of the survey).