Patrick R. Johnson, Ph.D., MJE

My Mission

I study how we come to know journalism—how it is taught, learned, internalized, and lived. At the heart of my work are two interconnected questions:
What could journalism become if it were more equitable, more imaginative, and more accountable to the communities it serves?
And how do we learn journalism—past, present, and future—in ways that either reinforce or challenge that possibility?

I approach these questions through the lens of education as institutional transformation. Journalism education isn’t limited to classrooms. It lives in onboarding manuals, newsroom routines, mission statements, and public trust campaigns. It circulates in pop culture, policy, and professional memory. I treat these sites as foundational—not ancillary—to understanding journalism’s values, futures, and public responsibilities.

My research is rooted in the belief that journalism can do more than inform—it can repair, care, and reimagine what’s possible. But only if we examine how it’s been taught to think otherwise.

A Framework for Sustainable Journalism Literacy

I ground my research in a model of sustainable journalism literacy, inspired by the Earth Charter and shaped by five key literacies:

1. Sustainability Knowledge: journalism must account for its long-term civic, cultural, and institutional impacts—not just content cycles
2. Systems Thinking: journalistic practice and knowledge operate within—and reinforce—larger systems of power, legitimacy, and harm
3. Social Justice: a more equitable journalism requires confronting exclusions: of people, histories, epistemologies, and publics
4. Futures Thinking: journalism must prepare for ethical futures, not just reactive responses to crises
5. Active Citizenship: journalism should cultivate engagement, responsibility, and imagination among the people it serves

This framework shapes how I approach pedagogy, media literacy, ethics, and institutional design. It also allows me to evaluate journalism’s claims to objectivity, professionalism, and authority on their civic terms.

What I Study and What I’ve Found

I study how journalism is taught—across classroom syllabi, ethical codes, correction practices, and public rituals. My work shows that journalism’s professional identity is quietly reinforced through structures of learning: in how educators define “objectivity,” how mission statements frame civic purpose, and how institutions decide what doesn’t belong in journalism’s story. Across multiple studies, I’ve found that ethics is often treated as vague, inherited, or assumed rather than interrogated or contextualized; that professionalism is presented as neutral but often masks normative values around race, gender, and identity; and that learning outcomes in journalism education rarely address care, inclusion, or humility—even when trust is in crisis. Through curriculum research, co-authored textbooks, and collaborative design with journalists, I work to redefine journalism learning as reflective, equitable, and civic-minded.

My model of News Literate Journalism reimagines news literacy as a metacognitive and relational practice. Rather than viewing journalists as literacy instructors for the public, I argue that journalists must be literate about their own institution—its constraints, histories, and obligations. My research has shown that journalists who engage in metacognitive reflection—thinking about how they think—are more adaptable, responsive, and trust-oriented. Audience distrust is often linked less to misinformation than to a sense of being dismissed or unseen. Journalism must shift from content-based literacy to relational transparency and reflexive care. This part of my research is grounded in both theoretical frameworks and empirical partnerships with newsrooms. Through studies on corrections, transparency tools, and trust-building, I aim to bridge scholarly insight and professional transformation.

I also explore how journalism shapes and reshapes queer life—through representation, silence, and historical memory. Drawing from queer theory, hauntology, and care ethics, I ask: What does it mean to be seen by journalism—and at what cost? From obituary coverage of queer figures to patterns of LGBTQ+ news avoidance, I’ve found that journalism often frames queer lives through moral ambiguity, erasing complexity in favor of containment or celebration; that disengagement among queer audiences is not apathy—it’s a response to cumulative harm, misrecognition, and exclusion; and that newsworthiness is still shaped by heteronormative assumptions, even in progressive reporting spaces. In response, I’ve developed the framework of restorative queer ethics, which centers advocacy, reflexivity, and responsibility. It invites journalism to shift from neutral reporting to ethical recognition and relational repair.

Finally, I study the boundaries of journalism by focusing on what gets cast out—pornography, tabloids, pop culture, far-right podcasts, and the people and ideas deemed deviant or unserious. My work shows that journalism defines itself not just by what it includes, but by what it refuses to be. Topics like sex, pleasure, and celebrity are often dismissed as low-value, yet deeply shape public culture and media learning. Studying deviant or “ten-foot pole” topics helps reveal journalism’s anxieties, inconsistencies, and missed ethical opportunities. This line of research blends cultural criticism, queer studies, and media sociology to challenge traditional boundaries and reclaim journalism’s imaginative and moral terrain.

I often describe my research identity through a framework I call “The Good, The Bad, and the Ten-Foot Pole.” The Good: journalism education as liberation, and news/media literacy as a means of building more inclusive, justice-centered practices. The Bad: marginal forms—tabloids, reality TV, moral panics, and “low-brow” media—that journalism disavows but cannot ignore. The Ten-Foot Pole: sex, sexuality, and queer life—topics seen as too risky or taboo. I study them not for shock value, but because they reveal journalism’s deepest fears and greatest possibilities. This framing reflects not only my scholarship, but my lived experience—as a queer educator, former high school teacher, and person shaped by institutions that taught me what not to be.

I am a mixed-methods researcher and transformative pragmatist, blending discourse analysis, interviews, curriculum studies, archival research, and qualitative surveys. My methods emerge from my questions—and those questions are rooted in equity, education, and possibility. I believe that research should be intellectually rigorous and publicly useful; challenge the institutions it studies; and offer frameworks for ethical, lasting change. Whether I’m collaborating with journalists, co-designing curriculum, analyzing syllabi, or reconstructing queer memory in press coverage, I approach my work as both critical intervention and care practice.