The everyday American’s life can be compared to that of a few L.A. drivers on the freeway. That is, while the speed limit says 65 miles per hour the temptation to travel 80+ miles per hour takes over. We want to get home—now. We want our non-fat, iced macchiato--now. We want our music on our iPods—now. We want fun. And well, appropriately, we want it now.
This trend is also apparent with our yearning for information. Today, cable and wireless Internet has long replaced the dial-up modem. And that means the World Wide Web finds that it has become the place of residence for the vast amount of information that we, the consumers, seek--whether that be for a sense of community, work, or to fulfill our desire to know random, useless facts.
And because fast, now, community, and information are terms we live by online journalism has also properly found its place as a Web inhabitant. And online journalism is found in many forms, including blogs. But for the sake of argument, here I am referring to news sites that are not related to newspapers or the local television news stations, despite their notable presence on the Internet. Instead I'm referring to sites like the Drudge Report and Slate.com
Online Journalism as an Enigma
Public mistrust of conventional forms of journalism (i.e. newspapers and television) creates a pile-up of pressure for reporters today. But journalists have another issue to worry about before they click and post any more stories on the web. They need to consider the drawbacks of pressing onward into cyberspace while disregarding the public’s inherent distrust of the media.
In what was called the Online Credibility Survey Belo Interactive, the Associated Press Managing Editors and the Ford Foundation conducted a study in order to find out how credible respondents believe news on the Internet can be.
To conduct the survey, Belo Interactive separated the 1649 respondents and their answers by age group (15-25, 26-34, 35-44, 45-54, 55-64, and 65+). Each age group reported that the most credible form of journalism was found in newspapers—not the Internet, which found its low believability similar to that of radio and television.
As for the layout to online news sites all you can say is, “Ugh!” as annoying and almost persistent pop-up ads beckon you to sign up for free ring tones. The survey reported the following about the connection between credibility and those ads:
- For Internet users 15-25 years old, 79 percent thought pop-up ads make an online news site less credible.
- For Internet users 26-34 years old, 71 percent thought pop-up ads make an online news site less credible.
- For Internet users 35-44 years old, 70%...
- For Internet users 45-54 years old, 70%...
- For Internet users 55-64 years old, 69%...
- For Internet users 65 years old and above, 62%...
The respondents also overwhelmingly reported that if they had to, they would not be willing to pay for online news.
In an article for the Online Journalism Review Mark Glaser says that online news sites are only getting “hits”, or views” because of their flashy appearance rather than competent writing style and substance. And while Internet users are reading these futile, rushed reports from online journalists news sites are getting rewarded on the backbone of the technically savvy.
Jim Lowney, also for the Online Journalism Review, reports his frustration with Internet news is their inability to communicate to the public what happens locally. He shows his frustration by saying, "Online journalism is so often a mirror of poor newspaper coverage instead of the fresh source of information that it should be -- like detailed local news."
Online journalism, currently, is in fact harmful to the world of journalism as a whole. It shows a lack of responsibility in regards to public opinion. And yes, public opinion does matter. Nobody wants a careless and lazy watchdog guarding his or her home. And to the public that’s exactly what we are.
Let out a whimper, a yelp. If we continue to push forward without looking back to adjust the public's faith in journalism we're surely headed to the pound.
On the Other Hand, Online Journalism is a Benefactor...
No one should have to twist your arm for you to admit that you want fun (or maybe even the school year to end)—and you want it now. Yes, déjà vu.
But just like you want fun, when you want new, breaking information you want it without delay. And that’s why online journalism is so beneficial.
According to a conference between journalists from the Poynter Institute, online journalism has a set list of guidelines it follows that is almost identical to the guidelines followed by a newspaper reporter. Under a section entitled the Role of Journalism in the Digital Age it is reported:
“No matter what the platform, the primary mission of journalism is to provide information that gives meaning and context to the events that shape our lives, our communities, our world. In doing so, we hold powerful interests accountable and remain true to our mission of public service through fair and accurate reporting.”
Mindy McAdams teaches online journalism at the University of Florida and she agrees that online journalism has the same authority as traditional news outlets. She says, “I disagree that Web sites suffer from looser standards. Most of the borderline material I have seen or heard about is on TV, usually cable channels, or non-mainstream Web sites. The mainstream journalism Web sites are managed pretty much the same as their associated print and broadcast products. The differences are quite small.”
The report by the Poynter Institute states further that it is the public who chooses the way in which they are informed. And in the same Online Credibility Survey given by Belo Interactive (mentioned above), the study found that 73% of the respondents wanted news quickly online, even if details were left out in a report.
Even still, the public’s view of the press is on the rise according to a study of media credibility by Northern Illinois University. And though the public rates the credibility of online media similar to that of other media, the study found it was actually journalists who rated online media as having lower credibility.
And that holds true with the idea that we are our own worst critics.
But, online journalism is a beneficial part of the public's information gathering. It gives the public what it wants, when it wants it.
Whether it's the latest news in Iran or who won Dancing with the Stars.
The only problem is you can't get away with spilling the coffee on the computer.
5.21.2007
5.14.2007
Mexicans on la tele
After five years ABC has decided to say adios to the popular television series, George Lopez. Lopez had a list of rants for ABC president Steve McPherson--some that even had to be excluded from publication, reports Los Angeles Times writer
Maria Elena Fernandez.
It could quite possibly be because I, myself, am Mexican but George Lopez created a sense of community among Hispanic people through television. Honestly, I can't think of any other television show that directly portrays the traditional Hispanic/Chicano family. It's terrible that his show has been cancelled. Now the only way we see Hispanics portrayed on sitcoms is when they are mentioned in a laughing manner.
George Lopez is to Hispanics what Bill Cosby is to African Americans--and all races can enjoy either show.
The best idea might be to create some sort of modern-day "Facts of Life" where many ethnic groups are covered. Of course, Blair, Tootie, Natalie, and Jo weren't Hispanic.
But I guess for today there's Ugly Betty and Mexican soap operas (which, by the way, are mucho mejor than any American soap opera).
Maria Elena Fernandez.
It could quite possibly be because I, myself, am Mexican but George Lopez created a sense of community among Hispanic people through television. Honestly, I can't think of any other television show that directly portrays the traditional Hispanic/Chicano family. It's terrible that his show has been cancelled. Now the only way we see Hispanics portrayed on sitcoms is when they are mentioned in a laughing manner.
George Lopez is to Hispanics what Bill Cosby is to African Americans--and all races can enjoy either show.
The best idea might be to create some sort of modern-day "Facts of Life" where many ethnic groups are covered. Of course, Blair, Tootie, Natalie, and Jo weren't Hispanic.
But I guess for today there's Ugly Betty and Mexican soap operas (which, by the way, are mucho mejor than any American soap opera).
5.13.2007
Media Boxing Match for the Web
Journalists who work for newspapers big and small, have long been passing the stigma that they are in fact the most "real" form of journalism. It's almost a justified jealousy. A print journalist works hard all day--knowing full well that his story might not be viewed more than the broadcaster’s 30-second-spot on Paris Hilton's jail time on tonight's evening news.
But there is a new battle emerging between the two forms of media. And it's one that has less to do with the relentless pursuit of truth and its presentation. Instead of pinning the news on airwaves against the news on recycled trees the fight for viewers has now hit the Web.
And now that the playing field has been leveled—do newspapers have something to brag about?
After reading Steve Outing’s article on Poynter.org, I found that in a recent report Borrell Associates (a company that helps local media with online advertising strategies) pointed out "We found that most local TV operators view the Internet more as a marketing opportunity and less as a business. Radio stations view the Internet much the same. ... We also found a startling lack of 'Internet vision' among most TV and radio station owners." Broadcasters must be “ceding” to newspapers as Outing puts it. After turning to annual reports it was the newspaper companies that decided to proudly display their “online ventures”.
And this seems to be warranted after an article on the Online Journalism Review by Terry Anzur—an anchor/reporter—referred to broadcast news as the Web’s “Beached Whale”. He says, “The whale on the beach is the traditional TV newscast and the receding waterline represents the shrinking broadcast audience.” And all of this came after a news/web summit in the nation’s capital for the Radio Television News Directors Association that dealt with the growing demand for media on the Internet.
And because TV news got off to a slow start in meeting that demand, the print medium rushed ahead and started perfecting their web design before broadcasters had any sort of clue as to what their audience wanted. Captivating pictures tend to cover the front page of newspaper websites—much like the front page of their newspapers. The day’s and now the hour’s top stories are front and center, ready for the short and sweet click of the mouse.
Newspaper websites are clean and simple. They provide a large number of links and now even a vast number of videos. Take that jab, TV.
And many news sites today follow the Los Angeles Times in also having a link for the day’s most read stories—an added bonus a reader doesn’t get from the newspaper. It increases a sense of community, letting the reader know they are reading what everyone else is.
But in the end—if all else fails—we must turn to the numbers. In 2000, the RTNDA found that even though almost all TV stations have news on their websites, only 25% of the sites actually turn a profit. An even larger number—one third—are losing money.
After I asked him about newspaper revenue, Steve Henson, and sports reporter and columnist for the Los Angeles Times applauded what the Internet does for newspapers. He says the staff at the Times is past the point of caring about everyone’s 50-cents and rather more concerned with being the number one place people turn to for Los Angeles news.
Bottom Line is—TV news directors can’t seem to find the bottom line when it comes to news on the web.
Broadcasters are born with an inherent advantage. That is, they can promote their websites to a larger audience. And while critics can refer to broadcasters and their Internet sites as “beached whales” they do so almost in secret. This gives broadcasters time to perfect their websites without suffering the public’s scrutiny (at least in this instance). And since the RTNDA’s first meeting in Washington D.C. in 2000, television journalists and their news directors have had plenty of time catch up to the demands of convergent media.
And in 2006 in an article on Poynter.org, Romonesko pointed out that the Project for Excellence in Journalism study was able to boast that network and cable television websites did a better job on Election Day than newspapers. The study found: “For top newspaper sites, finding the balance between speed and offering a rich narrative still has to be reconciled…They are still struggling with the possibilities and risks of real time news, something television has more experience with.”
Broadcast news websites have kept the spirit of TV news alive by having video to add to each story. Most TV news websites like Los Angeles’ leading stations CBS-2 and ABC-7 update their videos to keep in time with breaking news throughout the day—an idea that print journalists are now reluctantly having to imitate to keep up in this battle for the Web.
Broadcasters have a list of archives for their videos—and this has helped clear up any clutter on their sites. Also, like their competitors, TV news sites have helped organize their news in sections by creating links for local, national, world, political, entertainment, and sports news.
Most assuredly to the liking of Mike Ward, author of Journalism Online, ads don’t consume TV news pages either. While print sites must provide a space for their advertisements, the news tends to give advertisers 10 seconds before a package or other news story starts to roll. For the viewer, the TV news site is then easier to manage.
And like print journalists that are now having to play copycat, TV personalities are also having to write blogs to add to their websites. Stories that accompany video are no longer limited to just stories copied from the Associated Press either.
Also, most assuredly each anchor and reporter has a short biography included on the site. This gives TV news sites much more personality—which coheres with the spirit of TV news.
And besides, who wouldn’t love knowing the person they are reading and watching loves sushi and grew up in Rhode Island?
Exactly. TV news—winner by knockout.
To e-mail the author of this post click here.
But there is a new battle emerging between the two forms of media. And it's one that has less to do with the relentless pursuit of truth and its presentation. Instead of pinning the news on airwaves against the news on recycled trees the fight for viewers has now hit the Web.
And now that the playing field has been leveled—do newspapers have something to brag about?
Round 1: Newspaper Web Media
After reading Steve Outing’s article on Poynter.org, I found that in a recent report Borrell Associates (a company that helps local media with online advertising strategies) pointed out "We found that most local TV operators view the Internet more as a marketing opportunity and less as a business. Radio stations view the Internet much the same. ... We also found a startling lack of 'Internet vision' among most TV and radio station owners." Broadcasters must be “ceding” to newspapers as Outing puts it. After turning to annual reports it was the newspaper companies that decided to proudly display their “online ventures”.
And this seems to be warranted after an article on the Online Journalism Review by Terry Anzur—an anchor/reporter—referred to broadcast news as the Web’s “Beached Whale”. He says, “The whale on the beach is the traditional TV newscast and the receding waterline represents the shrinking broadcast audience.” And all of this came after a news/web summit in the nation’s capital for the Radio Television News Directors Association that dealt with the growing demand for media on the Internet.
And because TV news got off to a slow start in meeting that demand, the print medium rushed ahead and started perfecting their web design before broadcasters had any sort of clue as to what their audience wanted. Captivating pictures tend to cover the front page of newspaper websites—much like the front page of their newspapers. The day’s and now the hour’s top stories are front and center, ready for the short and sweet click of the mouse.
Newspaper websites are clean and simple. They provide a large number of links and now even a vast number of videos. Take that jab, TV.
And many news sites today follow the Los Angeles Times in also having a link for the day’s most read stories—an added bonus a reader doesn’t get from the newspaper. It increases a sense of community, letting the reader know they are reading what everyone else is.
But in the end—if all else fails—we must turn to the numbers. In 2000, the RTNDA found that even though almost all TV stations have news on their websites, only 25% of the sites actually turn a profit. An even larger number—one third—are losing money.
After I asked him about newspaper revenue, Steve Henson, and sports reporter and columnist for the Los Angeles Times applauded what the Internet does for newspapers. He says the staff at the Times is past the point of caring about everyone’s 50-cents and rather more concerned with being the number one place people turn to for Los Angeles news.
Bottom Line is—TV news directors can’t seem to find the bottom line when it comes to news on the web.
Round 2: TV Web Media
Broadcasters are born with an inherent advantage. That is, they can promote their websites to a larger audience. And while critics can refer to broadcasters and their Internet sites as “beached whales” they do so almost in secret. This gives broadcasters time to perfect their websites without suffering the public’s scrutiny (at least in this instance). And since the RTNDA’s first meeting in Washington D.C. in 2000, television journalists and their news directors have had plenty of time catch up to the demands of convergent media.
And in 2006 in an article on Poynter.org, Romonesko pointed out that the Project for Excellence in Journalism study was able to boast that network and cable television websites did a better job on Election Day than newspapers. The study found: “For top newspaper sites, finding the balance between speed and offering a rich narrative still has to be reconciled…They are still struggling with the possibilities and risks of real time news, something television has more experience with.”
Broadcast news websites have kept the spirit of TV news alive by having video to add to each story. Most TV news websites like Los Angeles’ leading stations CBS-2 and ABC-7 update their videos to keep in time with breaking news throughout the day—an idea that print journalists are now reluctantly having to imitate to keep up in this battle for the Web.
Broadcasters have a list of archives for their videos—and this has helped clear up any clutter on their sites. Also, like their competitors, TV news sites have helped organize their news in sections by creating links for local, national, world, political, entertainment, and sports news.
Most assuredly to the liking of Mike Ward, author of Journalism Online, ads don’t consume TV news pages either. While print sites must provide a space for their advertisements, the news tends to give advertisers 10 seconds before a package or other news story starts to roll. For the viewer, the TV news site is then easier to manage.
And like print journalists that are now having to play copycat, TV personalities are also having to write blogs to add to their websites. Stories that accompany video are no longer limited to just stories copied from the Associated Press either.
Also, most assuredly each anchor and reporter has a short biography included on the site. This gives TV news sites much more personality—which coheres with the spirit of TV news.
And besides, who wouldn’t love knowing the person they are reading and watching loves sushi and grew up in Rhode Island?
Exactly. TV news—winner by knockout.
To e-mail the author of this post click here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
