I'd like to expand on my idea from class, that it isn't necessarily the way the news is packaged, but the actual news that is being reported that is driving viewers away.
I think this holds true, because stunts like the nude news broadcasts and even news sites on the internet are not attracting viewers.
In a recent report, Doing Well and Doing Good: How Soft News and Critical Journalism Are Shrinking the News Audience and Weakening Democracy-And What News Outlets Can Do About It, Thomas Patterson from Harvard discusses how the downfall of journalists and the media to present quality products has aided in the loss of viewers.
In the report, Patterson sites a turn to soft news as one problem. Soft news is defined as news that highlights incidents anddevelopments that have little to do with public affairs and that are selected for their capacity to shock or entertain can distort people's perceptions of reality.
In contrast, hard news refers to coverage of breaking events involving top leaders, major issues,or significant disruptions in the routines of daily life, such as an earthquake or airline disaster.
The amount of soft news has increased, from less than 35% of stories in 1980, to around 50% today.
Soft news is associated with increased ratings, which explains why entertainment news is so popular. However, in Patterson's research, he discovered that a majority of people would rather hear about hard news stories.
In addition to soft news, the media has taken to providing a much more negative view of society. The place this is most evident is in politics.
In 1990, negative coverage of Congress was over 80%. Also, negative coverage of presidential candidates exceeds positive coverage.
Journalists and media outlets need to find new ways to reconnect with their audience. That has to include a trend change away from soft news.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment