In chapter three of Robert McChesney’s Digital Disconnect, the author brings up how recent parts of media have been changed because of the Internet, such as advertising based on what the audience wants and how copyright laws have changed the media. He also discusses how journalism has been changed, and I found that to be the most interesting part of this reading. McChesney writes about how “...the distinction between news media and entertainment media has been blurred, if not obliterated” (82). I found this to be the most thought provoking part of the journalism section, and I was able to think of certain examples from recent years that support McChesney’s claim about the problem with the state of journalism.
Upon reading that quote, I immediately thought of how our culture has become obsessed with high profile trials. I thought of two of the more recent trials like Casey Anthony and Jodi Arias. For those who don’t know, Casey Anthony was believed to have murdered her baby daughter, and Jodi Arias was believed to have viciously murdered her boyfriend. We watch the live feeds of the courtroom every day in both of these cases, we wait for verdicts to be revealed, and we wait to see what these high profile defendants do next. These high profile, very serious cases should be regarded as news, but we become so obsessed with them that we actually see them as entertainment. We would rather discuss Casey Anthony joining a reality show than discuss the logistics that caused the jury to find her not guilty of murdering her young daughter. That CNN article can be found under their entertainment section rather than their justice section where it probably should be.
I thought I could find an article discussing how the Casey Anthony trial was regarded more as entertainment rather than news, but while searching through the Google results, I came across a Wikipedia article describing what this type of news is. This type of journalism is called Sensationalism. The article states, “Sensationalism is a type of editorial bias in mass media in which events and topics in news stories and pieces are over-hyped to increase viewership or readership numbers.” Along with the Casey Anthony trial, Wikipedia uses the Bill Clinton/Monica Lewinsky sex scandal and the O.J. Simpson trial. The article also states that certain journalists or shows have been known to report incorrect facts when reporting these trials just to gain viewership. However, this can be very effective. Nancy Grace, for example, has been criticized in the past for misreporting information on high profile cases on her show. That didn’t stop her show from attracting the most viewers ever for the HLN channel when the Casey Anthony verdict was read. Her show reached five million viewers as that article states.
Bringing it back to McChesney’s text, the cause of the lack of distinction between news and entertainment news is commercial pressure, like commercials on the radio, television, and/or Internet. McChesney says this has been happening since the early 1980s, and “it has led to a softening of standards such that stories about sex scandals and celebrities have become more legitimate because they make commercial sense: they are inexpensive to cover, they attract audiences, and they give the illusion of controversy without ever threatening anyone in power” (91).
Do you guys agree with McChesney that commercial pressures on new technologies, like the Internet, have caused this decrease in journalism? Do you think that trials like Casey Anthony, Jodi Arias, and O.J. Simpson are seen as entertainment rather than serious news stories?
Jordan, I completely agree with you and McChesney about technology's influence on journalism. In Media & Society last semester, we frequently discussed the blurring lines between news and entertainment news. In recent years, news stories have become more entertaining and less informative. When I think of examples of this I immediately think of Good Morning America and The Today Show. While these programs are informative and do discuss serious news stories, the majority of the program is focused on something having to do with pop culture. Instead of focusing their shows on informative news stories these programs want to have the first post-wedding interview with Kim and Kayne. (I totally made that up but it could happen.) Entertainment news stories have become more popular than serious stories. Like your example about Casey Anthony, Jodi Arias, and O.J. Simpson, audiences were more focused on the dramatics involved in their trials than the actual murder trials. If networks can make something entertaining to attract audiences, they will do it. Overall, I completely agree with you. I think that commercial pressures on technologies have decreased the standard of journalism.
ReplyDeleteThanks for your response, Nora! I'm glad to see that you agree with me. I also thought of shows like The Today Show and Good Morning America while reading. I also thought of shows like The Wendy Williams show that promotes her "Hot Topics" segment in commercials for her show where they say they will be discussing the biggest stories like Lindsay Lohan's troubles, the Kardashians, or the latest drama on The Real Housewives of Atlanta. While I like her show and like discussing the topics she talks about, I think her show is an example of what has happened to news. With a platform like hers or the other shows you mentioned, I think they should be used to inform and educate the country on the truly important stories of the day.
DeleteJordan, I love your post. The amount of links you found for this topic shows how passionate you are about it. You are completely right in saying that “we would rather discuss Casey Anthony joining a reality show than discuss the logistics that caused the jury to find her not guilty of murdering her young daughter.” I also really appreciate the vocabulary lesson with Sensationalism. I didn’t know what the word was for over-hyped news stories so thank you. The quote you had in your post from page 91 of McChensey made me upset. “They are inexpensive to cover, they attract audiences, and they give the illusion of controversy without ever threatening anyone in power” should not be the point of news. Journalism to me is stories like the Washington Post’s Watergate coverage. It should be something meaningful and with impact. To respond to your questions, I do agree with McChesney that commercial pressures on new technologies, like the Internet, have caused this decrease in journalism. News outlets seem to be mostly for entertainment. This is particularly noticeable on CNN which plays in Lower that had Justin Bieber news all day when he got arrested. Who cares?! On the other hand, this makes me think about satirical news comedy shows like The Daily Show that serve the need for entertainment but also inform people of the news. I think you’re right in that trials seem like entertainment rather than news now. Your example of Nancy Grace is prime evidence for this.
ReplyDeleteCaroline, that quote you chose from McChesney's text upset me too, and I think it shows a major problem with journalism today. Some news stations just care about getting the story or new detail out first without really fact checking to see if it's accurate so they can gain viewership over their competitors. I did an internship this summer at a news station, WFMZ-TV, and they made sure this didn't happen because they always wanted to make sure their facts were accurate.
DeleteI also completely agree with the point you brought up about Justin Bieber. I was shocked to see that that story was shown as the "breaking news" all day on CNN the day he was arrested. While I do agree that it is a big story, I do not think it belongs on a station like CNN which primarily reports the truly important stories of the day.
As many benefits as technology has brought us, I think the effect it has had on journalism has been somewhat negative. In this day and age, with so many different news sites and independent websites competing with each other to report the news as quickly as possible, it has become more about who can report it first, or who can get the most hits. Because of this, information is sometimes reported inaccurately because the people writing it are rushing to get it posted.
ReplyDeleteAlso, in an attempt to get people to read their work, people who wouldn't be considered credible from places like Reddit will write false news in hopes of gaining attention. Just last week I saw an article that claimed Justin Bieber was slapped in a Starbucks by NBA star Blake Griffin. While I immediately was suspicious it was false, it nonetheless created a firestorm of activity online for a few hours until it was proven to be an untrue story. What I have learned reading articles online the last year or so is it is important to check for the validity of the article, because pretty much anyone can write something these days.
I completely agree, John. As I mentioned in my response to Caroline's comment, it's all about the news stations beating their competitors so they can have the most viewers for that hour of the day or for that story. I remember with the Sandy Hook shooting that CNN and other news outlets "confirmed" that the shooter chose the classroom he did because it was his mother's classroom. That ended up not to be true at all, so the stations should have tried to confirm that more before reporting it especially with such a tragic story. They reported it early because they knew that would be a huge breakthrough in the story, so they wanted the viewership by reporting it.
DeleteI also read about the story regarding Blake Griffin and Justin Bieber. Since Bieber isn't well liked right now by the country, many people who read that story hoped it to be true. News outlets ran with it because they knew a story about Bieber getting slapped would attract viewers, but it did end up to be incorrect.