For years, journalists have been marketing their stories to certain audiences based on location, status, age, and many other factors. Although the idea of trying to sell to a particular audience seems good, research found in "The Elements of Journalism" by Bill Kovach and Rom Rosenstiel suggests otherwise, and it seems they are right; readership of newspapers and viewership of news broadcasting is dropping rapidly, seemingly as a result of this marketing technique.
So what are the advantages and risks of journalists actively working to "market" their content to audiences?
It appears that the risk highly outweigh the advantages. Research in "The Elements of Journalism" shows that since the 1880s we have been making the same mistakes. By targeting one specific audience, countless other audiences are left out. By leaving out other audiences you lose the business from countless individuals. For example, many newspapers focus their material on the highly education middle to upper-class. This marketing technique is costing them dearly because they have neglected to develop a new generation of readers -- the youth and young adults. There is no younger generation interested in news.
Another problem mentioned in the book is that certain news forms leave out whole groups of people in a community, leaving, if you will, whole sections of a map blank. In order to be truly successful one must cater to the needs and interests of the whole map. If stories do not cover the whole community it will leave people poorly informed and making poor decisions because to much information is left out.
But, there can be some advantages when using marketing. A company can create a name for themselves in a certain niche business, like teen magazines, celebrity stories, or educated newspapers. If a person is looking for a certain type of information, using specific marketing can be very effective. Journalists should remember that the best research is "research that helps journalists make judgments, not research that replaces judgment." If journalists can use the information wisely, they will be very successful.
March 27, 2012
March 13, 2012
Role of Journalism in Democracy
“Free press can, of course, be good or bad, but, most certainly without freedom, the press will never be anything but bad.” - French Novelist
The most beautiful thing about the United States is the freedom the citizens enjoy, especially freedom of press. But the press is not just a luxury solely for enjoyment; the press is a connection between the citizens and the politicians.
Because direct democracy is no longer possible, we rely on the press to communicate between the politicians and the people. NowPublic.com said (here), "In the democratic equation, there are three types of identities: the politicians, the public, and the publication. The three elite ”P’s” of the democratic process which, through their correlation with each other, make modern democracy unique compared to other political philosophies." So democracy requires the communication between the politicians, the public, and the publication.
That being the case, the role of journalism in a democracy is to inform the people and make them aware of what is going on in politics so they can make informed decisions and votes. Without the press, the citizens would live in ignorance and democracy could not exist.
The press must be responsible with the power they hold to inform the people. If they lie or use misleading information the results can be catastrophic. So while it is their duty to inform the public, they must be responsible with this power.
The most beautiful thing about the United States is the freedom the citizens enjoy, especially freedom of press. But the press is not just a luxury solely for enjoyment; the press is a connection between the citizens and the politicians.
Because direct democracy is no longer possible, we rely on the press to communicate between the politicians and the people. NowPublic.com said (here), "In the democratic equation, there are three types of identities: the politicians, the public, and the publication. The three elite ”P’s” of the democratic process which, through their correlation with each other, make modern democracy unique compared to other political philosophies." So democracy requires the communication between the politicians, the public, and the publication.
That being the case, the role of journalism in a democracy is to inform the people and make them aware of what is going on in politics so they can make informed decisions and votes. Without the press, the citizens would live in ignorance and democracy could not exist.
The press must be responsible with the power they hold to inform the people. If they lie or use misleading information the results can be catastrophic. So while it is their duty to inform the public, they must be responsible with this power.
March 5, 2012
Religion and Journalism: Does it Mix?
"Journalists do not live by words alone, although sometimes they have to eat them." - Adlai E. Stevenson
Doesn't it seem that any time a journalist writes about religion (whether positively, negatively, or not at all) they end up eating their words after the story is printed? It is like you cannot win. You will either upset the atheists for discussing religion, upset the religious for not bringing enough attention to religion, or upset different religious sects for not being equal to all of them. The subject is just too touchy.
Perhaps this is why many journalists choose to ignore the religious aspects of many stories. It saves a lot of grief to ignore the situation in the first place. But is this right? Ignoring this aspect means potentially neglecting one of the most important values to Americans.
The problem is journalists learn to be objective and independent in their writing. It is the easiest way to inform the public without being biased. The public expects them to be honest and fair in their writing. That being said, religion is purely belief. There is no proof or fact involving religion. There are so many different facets and diversities involving religion that someone will always be upset. So with so many uncontrollable factors, a journalist has a tough time of being objective in religious stories.
So how can one reconcile personal religious beliefs with the independence, objectivity, and other expectations of professional journalism?
This is ultimately likely impossible. Each journalist has his or her own beliefs that affect his or her writing, whether intentional or not. But we have to try. A journalist can only do his or her best at trying to be objective. Here are a few ideas to try and incorporate religion and journalism.
1. Do complete research. Investigate what people really believe before you write a story about it. Giving or citing wrong information, or lack of information at all, will create anger and bitterness.
2. Cite sources from all sides. Learn about all sides' opinions.
3. Be professional. Handle all situations as a professional. Do the job the best way possible, and people will respond to the professionalism.
4. Do not be accusatory. If someone feels attacked, the accusations will come right back to the journalist.
5. Be honest. Simple as that.
While it is difficult to try and incorporation religion and journalism, it is something that must be done. To avoid difficult situations, a journalist must try to be as objective as possible. Do research, cite multiple sources, and handle the situation professionally.
What do you think? How can a journalist reconcile personal religious beliefs with the independence, objectivity, and other expectations of professional journalism?
Doesn't it seem that any time a journalist writes about religion (whether positively, negatively, or not at all) they end up eating their words after the story is printed? It is like you cannot win. You will either upset the atheists for discussing religion, upset the religious for not bringing enough attention to religion, or upset different religious sects for not being equal to all of them. The subject is just too touchy.
Perhaps this is why many journalists choose to ignore the religious aspects of many stories. It saves a lot of grief to ignore the situation in the first place. But is this right? Ignoring this aspect means potentially neglecting one of the most important values to Americans.
The problem is journalists learn to be objective and independent in their writing. It is the easiest way to inform the public without being biased. The public expects them to be honest and fair in their writing. That being said, religion is purely belief. There is no proof or fact involving religion. There are so many different facets and diversities involving religion that someone will always be upset. So with so many uncontrollable factors, a journalist has a tough time of being objective in religious stories.
So how can one reconcile personal religious beliefs with the independence, objectivity, and other expectations of professional journalism?
This is ultimately likely impossible. Each journalist has his or her own beliefs that affect his or her writing, whether intentional or not. But we have to try. A journalist can only do his or her best at trying to be objective. Here are a few ideas to try and incorporate religion and journalism.
1. Do complete research. Investigate what people really believe before you write a story about it. Giving or citing wrong information, or lack of information at all, will create anger and bitterness.
2. Cite sources from all sides. Learn about all sides' opinions.
3. Be professional. Handle all situations as a professional. Do the job the best way possible, and people will respond to the professionalism.
4. Do not be accusatory. If someone feels attacked, the accusations will come right back to the journalist.
5. Be honest. Simple as that.
While it is difficult to try and incorporation religion and journalism, it is something that must be done. To avoid difficult situations, a journalist must try to be as objective as possible. Do research, cite multiple sources, and handle the situation professionally.
What do you think? How can a journalist reconcile personal religious beliefs with the independence, objectivity, and other expectations of professional journalism?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)