Should Yesterday’s Media Adopt Trends of Today?
Part 2: The Tone of Today’s Reporting
Traditional media are in a sinkhole and new media are gaining altitude. Could the tone of today’s reporting be contributing to this unbalanced scale? This Psychology Today article on the human brain’s “negativity bias” explains why we dwell on bad news. It’s no wonder news outlets take advantage of reporting the negatives when people are biologically drawn to these stories, whether media professionals are aware of the science behind it or not.
I remember in journalism school a professor actually used the phrase: “If it bleeds, it leads,” and he was right. Thankfully, he followed it up with: “I know it’s sad, but it’s true,” acknowledging that no one wants to receive bad news, but it’s absolutely necessary in order to stay informed. As much as I believe all of that, I’m not convinced news outlets are in it for the public service rather than the ratings, especially when concluding a news station’s defense with “we’ll always look for those days when some good news screams, ‘Don’t forget about me!’”
Blogs are becoming pivotal in reporting and commenting on today’s news. While a blogger’s opinion and credibility are worth investigating, the fact that many bloggers link to news Web sites to support their arguments proves that opinions matter, regardless of your own. While bloggers may be more subjective in their writing, there’s usually (and their should be) meticulous research evident in their posts, putting money where their mouths are.
So what’s more credible? The sincere and intelligent subjectivity of a mommy blogger, or the sensationalized, bleeding and leading objectivity of a daily news reporter?
People have always had a so-called “negativity bias”. That is, they are only interested in stories that contain conflict. This is an essential fact in fiction, but few realize it applies to news as well. I wrote about this subject in 2002:
http://tinyurl.com/c746jz
Reporters don’t ask if a story is ‘positive’ or ‘negative’. Their question is, is it accurate or inaccurate. And if it doesn’t have a conflict element, it is now news. Simple as that.
As for what’s credible, you are not comparing the same things. An intelligent mommyblogger piece is subjective; it is a commentary. News reporting is objective, and should involve the reporting of fact.
Geoff Meeker
4 Mar 09 at 4:17 pm
I agree news reporting needs to be objective. I understand that if television anchors or newspaper reporters weave personal anecdotes into their stories, they may lose part of their audience, causing their networks/publishers/producers a great deal of grief.
I also think subjective commentary supported with concrete evidence, as reported by people who know what they’re talking about — according to years of specific, personal experience; professional endorsements; educated reports turned into popular case studies — shouldn’t be overlooked, especially considering more blogs are read in a single day than online news articles http://is.gd/lPdW.
If a blog is subjective, it can still be credible, but people shouldn’t assume that the commentary they read is the bottom line. After all, it’s commentary. That’s when researching on your own to verify what’s false and what’s true aids in determining credibility.
scott
4 Mar 09 at 4:46 pm
You are exactly right. You’ve just described my blog! I write about the media scene where I live (it’s very lively politically, and thus the media is too) and I often include an interview with someone as part of a blog entry, but I also inject my own opinion. It’s a blend of fact and opinion.
So, yes, readers have to read it with that in mind.
Geoff Meeker
4 Mar 09 at 5:11 pm
Unfortunately I think we have to keep that in mind with all media. It’s rare that I see a piece in print, online or on TV that isn’t skewed.
Jessica Gottlieb
4 Mar 09 at 9:48 pm
@Jessica Good point. I think media literacy should be included with education curricula starting at a young age.
scott
5 Mar 09 at 6:07 pm