|
Com 450: Senior Seminar -- Politics and Media |
Dr. Janet McMullen
|
Why We Hate the Media and Why We Need Them |
Last Updated: 09/10/2002
Primary Resources:
Why DO we hate the media?
(Discuss....)
1995: Walter Cronkite was still the most trusted man in the United States. Dan Rather didn't make the top twenty list. David Brinkley was listed as 6th, Peter Jennings at 7th. Research was done by MediaPoll. (TV Guide 2/4/95)
In 1996: "77% of the public were 'skeptical about the accuracy of the news stories and information presented in the media." (Yankelovich Monitor, 1996, cited in ASNE Journalism Credibility Project at http://www.asne.org/works/jcp/jcmain.htm , 9/98)
Share example from Fallows, p. 12
(Read the hypothetical situation to Peter Jennings and Mike Wallace concerning the North Kosanese ambush. Why would Mr. Wallace take the position he did?)
In class we discussed why the media is hated....
_____________________________________
Topics Fallows discusses: The public has little affinity for media because media practitioners....
Recent highly publicized events have helped break down popularity and credibility of the press:
Exorbitant Salaries
The public may question whether these people, or ANYONE, is worth that much money per year....especially if they see those individuals as "out for themselves" or insensitive to the needs of others.
Negativism:
People become disaffected with media and politics as a result of negative advertising and negative news stories. In fact, negativism in media coverage and political advertising may result in lower voter participation and higher degrees of cynicism. (Pinkleton, 1998)
Basic Values and TRUTH
It may also be that the general public sees basic values differently than journalists. Those values may impact expectations about the press and its role.
While, research shows that most Americans don't believe in ABSOLUTE truth, when it comes to news, they expect the new to deliver the FACTS, they expect ACCURACY and OBJECTIVITY. They realize they don't always get it, but that is their expectation.
What happens if journalists, educated in modernism and postmodernism, really don't think truth exists at all, but it's all a matter of perspective?
In, Ch. 1 "The Truth of News" of his book, News Values, Jack Fuller wrote:
"The thought that news reports should be true dawned on journalists only recently. Until well into the twentieth century, most American Newspapers propagandized on nearly every page. This sometimes meant strict adherence to a political party line. Sometimes it meant reflecting the personal and often eccentric view "
So Fuller defines news this way: News=significance + interest
Note that truth really isn't there...some assert that Washington correspondents agree with the spin doctors who believe that truth isn't real anyway, so you might as well do what you can to effect people's perceptions of the truth.
What are the implications of that concept of truth for journalists?
(Modernist, postmodernist perspective - no absolute...then what are you reporting? Why do investigations...?)
Whenever you deal with news and the expectation of objectivity, one must also consider the reality of bias which is going to "color" the truth...
So how does Fuller define Truth? He provides a list of the standards of truth for which he believes news people should strive.
Fuller provides a list of Fundamental Biases:
(For more information on these, See Ch. 1 of Jack Fuller, News Values, on reserve at the Library.)
Robert Entman, in his book Democracy without Citizens, makes some valid observations about bias.
"The problem is that facts do not speak for themselves. Choosing how to put the facts together and which to emphaisze inevitably affects what audiences perceive as reality........Journalists follow the work rules that objectivty lays down, but they cannot realize the aims of objectivity." (Entman, 1989, p. 31)
Bias is the opposite of objectivity.
Objectivity = depersonalization + balance
Depersonalization = no ideological perspectives or evaluations of the reporter should be included in the story
Balance = neutrality; conflicting sides of any dispute must be presented fairness and equanimity
Therefore
Bias = personal opinion and lack of balance
It should be noted that there is a difference between BIAS and SLANT:
Slant is the result of decisions that journalists make, decisions they MUST make...
Those decisions are influenced by two ideals of journalism:
These two ideals can come into conflict:
The goal of mirroring reality implies just reflecting what is out there, what's going on, with as much accuracy as possible, and as much objectivity.
The goal of watchdog implies that media elites must actively choose what to report and indeed must go after stories. That very process involves personal judgment and selection.
We're going to look at both Bias and Slant
Entman identifies four different types BIAS:
Let's look at each one of these:
Evaluation Bias: How media elites evaluate what is important? How do political elites evaluate what is important? They do it by looking at each other. It is supposed that the power brokers on the hill know who and what is important, so media elites watch them. If a junior member of Congress or an "unimportant" or unpopular government official draws attention to an event or issue, media is not likely to pay much attention or at best, approach with caution. When or if a higher ranking official addresses the subject, media elites are more likely to pay attention. When they do, public opinion grows, more political elites perceive the "safety" of addressing the issue. The more they do, and the more of them do it, the more attention is given by media and public opinion grows. The effect is spiral in nature.
It is important to note how that happened regarding the impeachment of President Clinton. As soon as one or two powerful Congressmen suggested that it should be considered or moved upon, others did as well.
Dependence between the observer and the observed is discussed by Fuller as well. He believes
"Reflexivity reigns" That means that news people and news elites need each other so badly, that they can't help but be influenced by that relationship." This can also be a part of news slant.
Production Bias: Production bias is the result of the demands of the television industry and the news producing system. It involves the issues of logistics, expense, audience interest, availability of video, and simplicity of explanation.
A recent paper offers some interesting light on production bias. How does having a "live truck" or "satellite truck" effect news judgment? In a survey of 108 senior reporters and 112 news directors, (Live News..., 1998) researchers reported more than half of the respondents reported "going live for the sake of going live." Many believed the quality of the reporting, i.e. checking facts, getting additional sources, etc., suffer under pressure to "go live." Others noted that they believed "going live" gave a story a false sense of importance, but was necessary to get their money's worth out of the new technology. The use of live technology was perceived to help get the story on first and that viewers knew who was live and who had information first, thus it made for good promotional material. Reporters generally believed the necessity for live broadcasts was driven by consultants. (Live News.., 1998)
How might this bias toward live reporting effect
Event Context: What else is going on? A story which might be a lead story one day could get bumped entirely out of the program if a bigger story breaks.
What else are we not hearing about because of the O.J. case or the Starr Report?
National newscasts only have about 22 minutes per broadcast. How much of what is important in the world can be told in the time available?
Dan Rather was interviewed for Brill's Content and asked, "So you are the guy who decide on July 29 that the demolition of O.J. Simpson's house at Rockingham was more important than thousands of people being killed on the Yangtze River?"
Rather responded, "We had both in the broadcast."
Bill, "You had both in the broadcast, but China was [after] Rockingham."
Rather: "Look, it was my responsibility ...."
Mr. Rather went on to explain how the decision was made and that the story was bumped to lower in the broadcast because of a press for time, because you have to run some celebrity news in order to survive and international news doesn't do well with the public. (For this excellent look at how decisions are made, see this article) (Brill, 1998 p.116)
Skill:
How well can you spin the tale? The "spin doctors" who are interviewed after every major speech or event are exhibiting their skill at putting the event in the best light possible for their bosses. Their job is to package the event into pictures, words or phrases that will get coverage. Their job is to place focus on the positive and draw attention away from information that might be counterproductive. Their job is to create perspective. To be, as we discussed in Mass Com Theory, primary opinion leaders.
How well they do their job can make all the difference in the world for a public figure. Entman compares an event from the Carter administration with on from the Reagan era.
After the failure of the attempt to rescue the American Hostages held in Iran, the Time cover had a headline reading "Debacle in the Desert" with a picture of a very dejected President Carter and another caption saying "....accepts full responsibility." "Fiasco in Iran" was the Newsweek cover caption and showed helicopter wreckage. Carter placed himself in the middle of that negative event and stayed there until he left office.
Mr. Reagan however, distanced himself from a terrorist bombing in Beruit which in which a number of American service personel were killed. The pictures on covers of newsmagazines showed Mr. Reagan returning home, grave and angry. Another picture showed him making a statement to the press about the tragedy, his wife Nancy, at his side, holding his hand. Her presence made the event a family loss, a personal concern, not a policy one, and that symbolism was very important. Mr. Reagan was seen not as the person who had made the bombing happen (which he had not) but the one who would try to make things right.
[For a more thorough discussion of these concepts and events, see Entman, Ch. 3 "Straight Talk on Slanted News: "Bias" and Accountability in Reporting Carter and Reagan." On reserve in the library.]
Whitehouse staffers released a 70+ page document responding to the Starr Report even before the report had been released to members of Congress or to the public. They were trying to get their position out first. You might check that out on the web and consider what kind of spin they were putting on the events. Similarly after the election of 2002, spokespeople on both sides were trying to win the war of public opinion about what had happened, what should happen, and what could happen to the benefit of their candidate.
As we watch President Bush and other members of the government respond to the 9/11 anniversary and the concerns about war with Iraq, watch how they try to frame the story. Skillful understanding of how news is reported, how it will be interpreted, and what reactions might be among several potential audience groups is absolutely necessary for successful management of diplomacy.
News SLANT has some varying levels as well:
Presidential Candidate Michael Dukakis spoke about his campaign experience by saying, "I said in my acceptance speech in Atlanta that the 1988 campaign was not about ideology but about competence...I was wrong. It was about phraseology. It was about 10-second sound bites. And made-for-TV backdrops." (Butterfield, 1990)
What about the importance of length? Incumbents received LONGER sound bites in both the '92 and '96 elections. (Lowrey, 1998)
According to the Center for Media and Public Affairs (9/28/00) the average soundbite from Labor Day to September 28th was 7.3 seconds. That reflected a 43% drop since 1968 when when soundbites were 42 seconds! (CMPA, 9/28/00)
The same study reported above, looked at the content of the sound bites, whether or not they were negative. They found that the Democratic candidate in both elections received the more favorable sound bites than the Repubican. (Lowery, 1998)
Edward J. Epstein, in his classic, News from Nowhere, addresses other types of bias in addition to production biases. These might be called institutional biases. They fit more under the Entman's SLANT category and adds some important perspective, I think.
To the degree that all of these elements contribute to bias and slant, stories from similar segments of the institution should be producing very similar stories. If these elements are built into news industry operation, then it make sense that this should happen.
Entman believes that the bigger the story, the similarity will be greater among all major news outlets covering it. That makes the impact they have on public opinion even more powerful. Consider the coverage of the O.J. Simpson trial or the Clinton scandal. Do you agree with him?
Negative Coverage:
So what if we have massive, similar coverage and that coverage is NEGATIVE?
Research shows that audiences do NOT like negative coverage of politicians, negative campaigns, nor do they like negative campaign advertising.
Newhagen reported in the Spring 1998 issue of JOBEM that images inducing anger, fear or disgust, will will cause audience to have strong reactions to the message, but those invoking anger or fear are remembered longer than those invoking disgust. In fact disgusting messages seem to inhibit memory.
What are the implications for the political process in the current presidential situation? How should such information effect "spin?"
Yet another study focused on negativism. Pinkleton, et. al, found that when the public feels negative toward campaign coverage, they reduce the amount they use media for political information. This negative attitude toward media coverage is positively related to cyncism, and cynicism is strongly related to a feeling of powerlessness concerning government and the election process. Nor do voters like negative campaign ads, and such advertising may cause them to decrease their attention to campaign advertising and political coverage. While people who are interested in the election may turn to media outlets for information, they may be turned off by what they find. The media coverage may indeed diminish electorate participation in the process, which is the opposite of what it is intended to do! (Pinkleton, 1998)
Open vs. closed story approach:
If institutional constraints and values have significant influence on the way stories are covered, there should be differences in story coverage when media outlets are structured differently. That's what some researchers tried to find out when he compared treatment of stories on the networks (commercial media outlets) and on the Leher Newshour on PBS (non-commercial outlet). In this study the concept of 'open" and "closed" approaches to stories was considered .
Sure enough, the researcher found that the commercial networks presented stories in a way which was much more closed, while the Leher Newshour provided much more open stories. Freedom from many of the commercial institutional constraints of time, mass appeal, and loyalty to sponsors and parent company appear to have resulted in this more open presentation of new on PBS. For more on this very interesting research, see Dr. Mc. (If students would like, it can be placed at the reserve desk in the library.) (Holbert, Zubric and Hicks, 1998)
Just how much DOES media ownership influence the content of the news? The issue of corporate profits have been the focus of a number or articles and studies in the recent months.
The coverage of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 provides an interesting example:
Brown examined this question by evaluating coverage of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 by the television network news divisions. While the legislation was called revolutionary and called a watershed in broadcast history, the American public knew very little about it until after the fact. Under the marketplace of ideas concept, the press is seen as a way for the citizenry to be informed enough to hold the government accountable even if that means creating conflict. We see examples of that during the pre-revolutionary war period, the civil rights era, and Watergate. But what if it is to the ADVANTAGE OF THE MEDIA to keep the public Uninformed? What if the financial interests of the owners of media outlets involve a lack of public debate and decisions were made by a few well-placed "experts."
Such a scenario is not one that gets much attention, but it may have happened in this case. Brown looks at the coverage of the T-Com Act of 1996 by the three networks and found there was little if any for months on end. Nightline dealt with the issue and the issues of media ownership a week before the passage of the bill. (Brown, 1998)
Ted Koppel, opened the June 14 program by saying:
"It's possibly the most important communications bill in history, and here's what the networks had to say about it. NBC said, 'No comment.' ABC suggested that we talk to CBS who also told us 'No comment." And Fox? They said, 'No comment.'" (Nightline, June 14, 1995, quoted in Brown, 1998)
When big companies share their big profits with politicians, should be asking what "the deal is?" Just some of the media money going to politicians ....
SYNERGY
What role does ownership and profit motive play in sports coverage? It may have something to do with the fact that we don't think about coverage of sports events as journalism - at least not at first. More than nine major media owners have significant interests in professional sports franchises, including
Network sports executives claim that sports is entertainment and that that is all viewers want, but some news programs like Real Sports do very well with viewers and offer hard-hitting coverage of sports issues. More than $17.6 Billion will be paid for network contracts for ABC, NBC, and CBS for NFC over the next eight seasons. Could all that money have a chilling effect? Nobody wants to lose the contracts....(Strauss, 1998).
The term synergy represents this "give-and-take, I'll-scratch-your-back-you-scratch-mine" arrangement.
According to a recent article, between March and August of 1998, ABC News used its Sunday broadcast to promote big-budget releases from its parent company, Disney. The films were Good Will Hunting, The Horse Whisperer, Armageddon, and Deep Impact. Oddly enough, the news program also did "news" stories about whether or not asteroids really were a potential hazard, one on the same night as the piece about Deep Impact. (Glasser, 1998)
For more information about who owns what, check out CJR's web site: www.cjr.org for a resource on that issue. Click on "Who Owns What?" for the latest information about ownership.
A recent story in Columbia Journalism Review opened with a quote, "If a story needs investment of time and money, we don't do it any more." (Hickey, 1998) In the article it is argued that publicly traded media companies are more concerned about the bottom line than reporting the news as a public servant. The increasing similarity of prime time news programs to tabloid shows is a direct result of the press for profits. According to Walter Cronkite, the networks news divisions are wasting valuable prime time by airing pieces more suited to movie magazines than the hard hitting, touching documentaries they could and should be doing.
David Shaw, of the L.A. Times is quoted, "Today, many newspaper owners insist on high quarterly dividends...thus depriving the papers of money; there is little question that the shift form individual and family ownership to public ownership has increased the demand for higher short-term profits. In or to make their stock attractive to investors, newspaper companies promise higher profits every year (if not every quarter). That sets up unrealistic expectations...." (Hickey, 1998)
In another story a "grid" system and a "spreadsheet" system are discussed; these are management techniques to insure that reporters produce enough words per day to earn their pay....(Underwood, 1998)
So what is the problem? How does all of this effect objectivity? Why do these things lead to distrust and dislike of media? Be sure you can discuss these issues thoroughly.
Valuable resource LINKS:
[Since the articles referenced are all from recent issues, not all are posted on the web at this time. They may be available at a later date. Bookmark the publication web site so you can find them later if you choose. Check Collier Library if you want copies and I think all of the publications are available at Books A Million. Subscription rates are under $20.00. If you need more information, check the web site or see Dr. Mc]
Brill's Content - www.brillscontent.com Brill's content is no longer in publication, and urls are for reference only. Those links are no longer active.
Resources:
Copyright,
2002
Dr. Janet McMullen
Return to Com 450 page
Return to Dr. Mc's Home Page