Learning about Research from Youth Media Artists

Learning about Research from Youth Media Artists
by Elizabeth Soep

As I read this article, I was at first intrigued by the description of a program where high school youth are given the opportunity to take some free
after school classes and then are allowed to participate as interns in a producer of youth voices called Youth Radio. Soep argues that it may beneficial to think of these youth as producers of research. She wants to do this because she’s knows of scholars “want to work with youth as agents, and not only like objects, of research.” p2. I think I can understand why they would want this. I can see how the idea of studying people like objects, like rats in a maze, if offensive. But from this paper, I don’t see this happening at Youth Radio.

Elisabeth Soep wanted to involve youth in the actual research of youth culture and not just relegate youth to the role of those studied. At Youth Radio, the teens produce the stories based on questions that are of interest to them about youth culture. They collaborate with other youth to produce these stories at the same time they are being mentored by adults who work with them.


Soep asks us to think of the high school students working at Youth Radio in a role in addition to the their roles as producers of radio shows. She suggests we think of them as researchers.

If we can do that, then Youth Radio is a place where the line between seeing youth as objects of research and participants of research at least gets blurred. Perhaps we can study youth culture in this way and do so without seeing the youth as objects of the research. I’m not sure I completely understand this difference.

“We want to work with youth as agents and not only objects, of research.” Certainly when we work with someone, we are learning from him or her as well as about him or her. But that is real different than saying they are objects of research. As a teacher, I usually simply focus on teaching. Occasionally, I’ve used my students for a little research project. I don’t do this very often, because it distracts me too much from my teaching. I don’t read about Soep or others studying the young producers in this way and I don’t think that’s what she means.

We can say that the youth are producing research when they produce their radio shows. But doing research and producing a radio show are two different activities. So I don’t think she is meaning that youth research is being conducted in this way. Or maybe she does. Maybe she means that when youth produce a show about a failing urban school, she means they’re doing research on the subject. But that would mean that channel 2 is doing research when the reports interview and gather facts about one of their stories. We don’t call that research. Or maybe she means that adults can study the shows the youth produced as a youth perspective on a subject. But that would be one group of youth’s perspective on the subject and that’s not generally considered research.


Soep admits she is “treading on dangerous territory” by side-stepping “debates about what exactly differentiates journalism from quantitative research.” I don’t mind an author venturing out into uncharted territory, but with this article; I don’t really understand what the benefit is. The best I can tell, she is looking for ways for researchers to study youth without putting the youth in the role of object. She wants those who are researched to be more involved in the study itself. She wants them to be agents in the research.

I think this is related to the larger question that all researchers who study humans face. How do you study a person or a group without objectifying them? By sidestepping this issue, she never really addresses it.

I wish she had been clearer about the kind of research that she hopes the programs like Youth Radio will bridge. Certainly working with youth and giving them responsible positions and taking what they say seriously can enlighten the adults who work with them. But why would I call that research?

I have no problems with turning away from standard research conventions to look at the ways the youth are using imagination and creativity to study aspects of youth culture and produce radio programs on these topics. As she says, the youth are storytellers themselves. It sounds like a wonderful program which is benefitting both the youth and the adults who work there. I think she should be proud of being a part of it. I suggest we call them storytellers, reporters, or journalist. Let’s not call them researchers.