On page 43, he cites political scientist Robert M. Entman to divide media into four categories and then applies five key journalistic standards to them. This is very, very useful. Does what he says fit the media you watch/read? Think of a specific example and see if his rules apply.
Also, remember to submit news quiz questions by e-mail, unless you want everyone to see them on the blog.
I think Jones' divisions of the news fit with what is being offered right now. The divisions do, at the very least, remain consistent with Jones' argument of an "iron core" of news.
ReplyDeleteThe thing that was surprising was his placement of local television reporting outside the realm of "traditional", especially since I think a lot of people in a given city get a significant portion of their news from local news stations.
I think his example of "advocacy" - Bill O'Reilly - is accurate. I also think other news stations (e.g. CNN, MSNBC) have advocacy journalism in the likes of a Rachel Maddow or Keith Olbermann.
The question that I have is whether or not people can discern between them, and whether or not the different types of media do a decent enough job of honestly representing themselves. True, the "Today" show could have accurate news, but it's geared more toward entertainment than the "iron core" in most cases. This is why the anchors, say, wear costumes at Halloween, throw weddings, etc.
I think the problem with not being upfront about this, or at least about educating the public, is that people think everything on advocacy, entertainment, tabloid types of news are part of that iron core. Which brings me back to the underlying wonder I've had all semester: whether or not the inability of the general population to be critical consumers of media is causing a problem.
That’s funny! I worked on my 2nd reaction paper last night. In it I explained how I felt compelled to analyze the articles in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel (we subscribe) according to the 4 criteria of news described by Hughes in Adam’s book. In terms of Entman’s breakdown mentioned in Jones, I think it fits what I read. I’ll use an example from Tuesday’s main section, an article entitled “There’s half a truth in pay raise claim,” that is part of the Journal Sentinel PolitiFact (check) Wisconsin series. I see the standard of accuracy applying to the article. The article investigated a claim/statement made by a person running for U.S Representative seat about another person running for the same seat. The reporter interviewed a campaign spokesperson for the person who made the claim and asked for evidence to back up the statement. The reporter also described how the actual system works which created the event about which the person made the claim. The reporter also had information from a Senate Chief Clerk that pointed out what seemed to have actually happened. To me, this article follows the accuracy standard based on the interviews and quotes from credible sources and trying to provide a factual basis for the story. It also felt balanced to me because it provided the other side to the claim – the actual evidence and whether it supported the claim. For this reason, I would put the article in the traditional journalism category. As for other articles in the section, they probably did not all fit the traditional category so the paper itself could be seen to belong to a mix of categories.
ReplyDeleteI will admit that I have struggled the past few days to determine what category my "news" fits into. I am still attempting to decipher which pieces/news organs are advocacy and which are traditional. I want to be a critical consumer, but find that most often I am disheartened by local news for covering issues which to me seem more sensational. While it is important to perhaps cover shootings in Milwaukee or the beating of the mayor, it also seems to overwhelm local media. That being said, I would like to ask if anyone else finds weather NOT a breaking news item, unless a tornado is approaching. I certainly don't want to be told every few minutes about the same weather system and am NOT getting up early to watch from 4 a.m. about 2 inches of snow. I don't know which category this falls into, but it feels just like junk. Am I alone in this?
ReplyDeleteI'm with you, Maureen. While I think that Entman's categories fit today's media pretty well, it is sometimes difficult when trying to figure out where certain news stories should be.
ReplyDeleteI understand that there is the occasional "slow news" day (which is still perplexing to me since we live in such a big city). I know editors have to do their jobs and report what interests readers, along with reporting the most important issues.
Weather is important. It is. But only when it's really threatening (like back in July). Maybe it's not our county that's getting the bad weather, but the news stations cover more than just our county, and because of that, we're stuck with the constant weather bulletins. There's no way around it.
Local stations/papers are going to report local news (obviously). Some of the items might not be all that important to some of us, but they need to fill their pages/television time. Something has to go there, and if that's yet another story about a shooting on the south side, then so be it. I do agree though, that it'd be nice to see some broader (national) coverage on things. I know that's what NBC Nightly News is for, but I think it would be nice to see the local stations pick some of it up, too.
Admittedly, I seem to be drawn the most to tabloid journalism, mainly because I like to have a good mix of seriousness and entertainment. Jones points to People magazine as an example of this kind of media, and I will honestly say that this is the first magazine I am likely to pick up. Sure, there is celebrity gossip in them, but they usually include more serious, pertinent news stories in them, too, on both a national and international scale. Jones is entirely right that when it comes to accuracy, tabloid publications are severely lacking. They may believe that their facts are correct, but oftentimes, it can be proven that they are wrong. Is this because they are trying to gain more readers or sensationalize something? Quite possibly. Even if this is the case, though, people still buy into tabloid journalism, so they must be doing something right.
ReplyDeleteWhen it comes to TV news, I am inclined to watch CNN news because they (almost always) stick to reporting legitimate, important stories. Then again, I have found that a few of their TV personalities are a bit too biased and do not always stick to facts, instead incorporating their own opinions. During coverage of the 5-year anniversary of hurricane Katrina, a lot of their reporters seemed to slip in their own feelings on related issues. I suppose this is not a big deal, but it took away from what they were talking about because the information was not always based on facts. I know objectivity is not as important as it used to be in the media, but sometimes news stories need to be free of biases so as to not alienate readers and viewers.
Also, I agree with both Kerri and Maureen when it comes to weather not being breaking news. If incredibly bad weather is on its way, that is one thing. Weather is not really news. There is nothing more irritating than watching a TV show and having it interrupted by breaking news that is simply weather related. Unless a storm of some sort is coming and promises to be threatening, it does not need to be all over our TV screens.
Traditional journalism such as New York Times, Boston Globe, and Los Angeles Times. I do agree that most papers still follow the five key journalism standards, but some do not. Kenosha News focuses mainly on human interest stories, sports, advertisements, and comics (on Sunday, readers get four pages with that includes ads by Walgreens). Rarely does it include the iron core. It does mention briefly the candidates who won after an election and ordinances passed, but not on the front page. The task requires some hunting and digging. Don’t know about the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel or the Racine Journal.
ReplyDeleteTabloid journalism. Surprised that Jones included local television news. I do agree that the station reports more on human interest stories than political news, but to label it tabloid seems a little bit over the top. As he states, “local television news shifted away from any coverage that would have been part of the iron core” (47). About a week ago, CBS 7 Chicago reported on the Health Care Reform and the policies going into affect on the 23rd; the war in Afghanistan; and a citywide ordinance to clean up city parks, beaches, and subways. Maybe by local, Jones means smaller cities and towns. When I think tabloid, Globe and Enquirer come to mind along with “Elvis alive and living with an alien stripper”.
Advocacy shows like Rachel Maddow, Keith Olberman, and the Ed Show for democrats. Then Glen Beck for republicans. Good to get both sides on an issue, but viewers should have a bipartisan source for backup.
Entertainment brings to mind People magazine. I do agree that this media “has no meaningful commitment to accuracy, balance, holding government accountable, or separating news from editorial or advertising” and that its out for money (50). As long as readers know and understand this, no detrimental harm should come to iron core news. For as Dickens’ said in Hard Times, “People must be amuthed”.
Yes, Entman’s categories describe the media I watch. Even though I am not a regular television news watcher, I have noticed that local news show incorporate a certain element of entertainment into their broadcasts. Typically the entertainment piece is what is used on the commercials to entice viewers to watch the five o’clock show. Clearly this is done to boost ratings as ratings directly impact advertisers.
ReplyDeleteWeather is another important piece for local news. To capitalize on this, one of the local shows is now doing weather earlier in the broadcast instead of toward the end as it is normally done with most broadcasts. Again, to entice, viewers, the hook used on their commercial promos is they don’t make you wait for the weather.
I rarely read my local newspaper, but what Entman describes about the meaningful coverage of politics and policy is all but abandoned in local news is true. For example in last Monday’s edition, there is one page devoted to State/National news. On this page there is just one article, ‘GOP divided on how to replace health overhaul’. The article includes a nice size picture of Paul Ryan. The rest of the page consists of advertisements.
This is markedly different from the New York Times and the Wallstreet Journal publications I read a few weeks ago. The bulk of these publications carry articles pertaining to politics and policy and other articles that could impact people’s lives in some significant manner.
Sometimes I allow myself to get caught up in the celebrity news shows before I snap out of it, knowing that nothing they’re talking about makes a difference to me one way or another.
Of course these shows are pure profit driven. Fortunately, for the advertisers, many people watch this meaningless mess. Clearly these entertainment news shows miss the mark on all five of Entman’s key journalism standards—accuracy, balance, holding government accountable, and separation of news from editorial and advertising. It’s pure sensationalism.
Maureen,
ReplyDeleteWisconsin weather, especially in the winter, is important, but I agree, it is NOT a breaking news item. Local news, I think, sensationalizes the weather which most likely is an attempt to boost ratings.
Interesting how the weather was something that stuck in our minds. We definitely have an interest in it because it matters when we decide to wear a coat or not--or get up early to shovel snow--or hit the basement because a tornado is out there. But I think they drive us crazy with their coverage. I'm betting it's the 24/7 philosophy that's behind it. It's hard to come up with things! And how do they know when we've turned on the set? Yes. I think they overdo it (except when I want to know if the garden needs watering, of course).
ReplyDelete