On not going too fast with slow journalism

The phrase “slow journalism” is (slowly) entering the dictionary of journalism scholars. Le Masurier's contribution in this journal in 2015 was a stimulating invitation to understand how “slowness” could summarise many current changes in journalistic practices, and to remind also that “Journalism is a plural noun.” This article firstly questions the polysemy of “slow journalism.” Slowness may wrap many layers of meaning. Slow means far from pack reporting, investigative, and more selective in its targets. But slow could as well suggest: narrative, fair (with its sources and readers), participative, community oriented, and finally, giving priority to untold stories. How can researchers deal with such a richness of meanings? The suggestion here would be double. Slow journalism should be considered as a Weberian ideal-type, questioning, not mirroring, the reality of journalism. A “soft” mapping could invite rethinking the space of slow journalisms in three (overlapping) sub-groups: explanatory, narrative, and mobilised. But claiming the need for “soft” mapping also means paying attention to fuzziness in journalistic practices.