Comprehensive and Proportional Journalism
This presentation was interesting in that it brought to light the frivolousness of journalism in our society today.
The group presented on how sensationalism is proportionally reported on more than articles with relevance to the common viewer. They talked how it is cheaper to report on famous celebrities like Anna Nicole Smith and Britney Spears, rather than report about foreign countries. It is easier to report about these things, as well as it will also drive up revenue for the news media outlets.
Scott Smith, a writer for blogcritics.com wrote, "watch out for in your local news is how newsworthy the information is. It can be hard to fill a half hour, or hour, with actual news, and we've been conditioned by the media to expect entertainment in everything we watch. But is it really news when your local news station devotes five minutes to the popularity of Ipods? Or the Xbox 360? Is it news, advertising, or both? (see: http://blogcritics.org/video/article/infotainment-or-journalism/#ixzz0kGuuO5R4.)
Sometimes news broadcasts just want to fill in that time slot with what people 'want' and not what they 'need'.
In our reading it said that, "Journalists need to focus on people and their problems, not politicians and theirs". A journalists duty is to the people, and to help their viewers/consumers solve their problems through their work. A journalist, may report on a politicians weaknesses, but if that is ALL they report on, then a consumer will stop reading or watching that media outlet, because the news can not be relevant to them.
Greenslade, a writer for the Guardian online paper in Britain, wrote that, "Meanwhile, we see clearly the generational shift of digital natives from traditional to online news - so the challenge for traditional news companies is complex. They need to invest in new products and services - and they have. But they've also got to invest in quality, influence and impact. They need to invest in journalism that makes a difference in people's lives." (see: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2008/mar/03/relevantjournalismthedigita).
Journalism must not give into pressure from outside forces such as marketing advertisers and owners of their companies. They must invest in quality, and also invest in journalism that will affect the lives of it's consumers. It shouldn't be sensational, or wracked in too much emotion. It should report for the people with the facts. As the group that presented said, "Readers want emotional stories, not emotional journalists".
Stephen Tanner
The group presented on how sensationalism is proportionally reported on more than articles with relevance to the common viewer. They talked how it is cheaper to report on famous celebrities like Anna Nicole Smith and Britney Spears, rather than report about foreign countries. It is easier to report about these things, as well as it will also drive up revenue for the news media outlets.
Scott Smith, a writer for blogcritics.com wrote, "watch out for in your local news is how newsworthy the information is. It can be hard to fill a half hour, or hour, with actual news, and we've been conditioned by the media to expect entertainment in everything we watch. But is it really news when your local news station devotes five minutes to the popularity of Ipods? Or the Xbox 360? Is it news, advertising, or both? (see: http://blogcritics.org/video/article/infotainment-or-journalism/#ixzz0kGuuO5R4.)
Sometimes news broadcasts just want to fill in that time slot with what people 'want' and not what they 'need'.
In our reading it said that, "Journalists need to focus on people and their problems, not politicians and theirs". A journalists duty is to the people, and to help their viewers/consumers solve their problems through their work. A journalist, may report on a politicians weaknesses, but if that is ALL they report on, then a consumer will stop reading or watching that media outlet, because the news can not be relevant to them.
Greenslade, a writer for the Guardian online paper in Britain, wrote that, "Meanwhile, we see clearly the generational shift of digital natives from traditional to online news - so the challenge for traditional news companies is complex. They need to invest in new products and services - and they have. But they've also got to invest in quality, influence and impact. They need to invest in journalism that makes a difference in people's lives." (see: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2008/mar/03/relevantjournalismthedigita).
Journalism must not give into pressure from outside forces such as marketing advertisers and owners of their companies. They must invest in quality, and also invest in journalism that will affect the lives of it's consumers. It shouldn't be sensational, or wracked in too much emotion. It should report for the people with the facts. As the group that presented said, "Readers want emotional stories, not emotional journalists".
Stephen Tanner
Comments
Post a Comment