What's journalism for? Helping citizens define the communities the live in and helping create a common language and common knowledge rooted in reality, as well as identifying a community's goals, heroes and villains.
For example, how does The State News do this? By covering events and happenings interesting, relevant and useful to MSU students, staff and faculty and East Lansing residents; by telling the truth so that people will have the information they need to act in their own best interests; and to sere society by informing the people.
Why do people want to be informed? It's because of the "awareness instinct." History shows that people crave news out of basic instinct. People want to know what's going on in their world and beyond their world. Like at MSU, people may be wondering if another tuition increase is brewing. Or if there's another Cedar Fest being planned. Or if the campus is safe to walk at night.
Knowledge of such unknowns help give people security (for example, you can avoid unsafe places). It allows them to plan and negotiate their lives (you can save up or get a bigger loan to blunt a tuition hike). It becomes the basis for creating community and making human connections ("Hey, you going to Cedar Fest?").
How does this help society? History shows the more news and information a society has, the more democratic it is. Knowledge truly is power, and knowledge to the people is power to the people.
How does a free press fit into an electronic age? The Internet specifically and technology in general has dissipated the means of mass communications to the people. People are moving from being passive consumers of news into active participants, with many choices in where to receive news.
Twenty or so years ago, consumer choices were limited by technology. There was not much of an Internet, so choices were print or broadcast or get on a plane and see for yourself. Today, the Internet allows people to choose local media, out-of-town media, social networks, alternative media, whatever.
What's the effect? Journalists no longer control the flow of information. The classic role of "gatekeeper" is irrelevant. News can go around journalism "gates" via the internet. Now, the role of legacy journalism is to make sense of the massive sea of information that's available to the audience. We verify what information is reliable and then order it so people can grasp it in a useful, meaningful way.
(In a way, it's the difference between going to the supermarket and trying to make a great meal, or going to a great restaurant and having that meal made for you. People don't necessarily have the time, desire or skills to sort through all the food choices out there to make a great dinner. In teh same way, they don't necessarily have the time, desire or skills to sort through the flood of information choices now available, so they go to a media professional for that.)
If journalism is to survive, then it must become a force in empowering citizens to shape their own communities based on verified information. You may learn of something from a tweet, but you find out if it's true and what it could mean from a journalist.
How does mass media stay relevant in an era of niche media? Before we can answer that, let's first explore the Theory of the Interlocking Public. It's the idea that everyone is interested and even expert in something. Niche media exploits this by catering to niche interests. For example, sports people go to ESPN. Gossip junkies go to TMZ. Political junkies go to Politico. MSUers go to The State News.
The theory implies that there are three broad levels of public engagement on every issue; that is, on any given issue, people are members of one of three groups:
The involved public: people who have a stake in an issue.
The interested public: people with no direct role in the issue but who is affected by and responds to the issue.
The uninterested public: pays little attention and will join, if at all, after the issue has been laid out by others.
We are all members of one of these three groups. For example, if the issue was a tuition increase at MSU, the involved public would include students and parents of students. The interested public would include staff, faculty, alumni, and people who will be attending MSU in the future. The uninterested public would include people not in school and/or who don't know anybody in school.
Our challenge is to write stories that may be meaningful and useful to those involved and interested, and interesting and understandable to those who on the surface are uninterested; and to offer a sufficient mix of stories in every newspaper and on every TV newscast that every member of the audience would be interested in at least one of them.
For example, how does The State News do this? By covering events and happenings interesting, relevant and useful to MSU students, staff and faculty and East Lansing residents; by telling the truth so that people will have the information they need to act in their own best interests; and to sere society by informing the people.
Why do people want to be informed? It's because of the "awareness instinct." History shows that people crave news out of basic instinct. People want to know what's going on in their world and beyond their world. Like at MSU, people may be wondering if another tuition increase is brewing. Or if there's another Cedar Fest being planned. Or if the campus is safe to walk at night.
Knowledge of such unknowns help give people security (for example, you can avoid unsafe places). It allows them to plan and negotiate their lives (you can save up or get a bigger loan to blunt a tuition hike). It becomes the basis for creating community and making human connections ("Hey, you going to Cedar Fest?").
How does this help society? History shows the more news and information a society has, the more democratic it is. Knowledge truly is power, and knowledge to the people is power to the people.
How does a free press fit into an electronic age? The Internet specifically and technology in general has dissipated the means of mass communications to the people. People are moving from being passive consumers of news into active participants, with many choices in where to receive news.
Twenty or so years ago, consumer choices were limited by technology. There was not much of an Internet, so choices were print or broadcast or get on a plane and see for yourself. Today, the Internet allows people to choose local media, out-of-town media, social networks, alternative media, whatever.
What's the effect? Journalists no longer control the flow of information. The classic role of "gatekeeper" is irrelevant. News can go around journalism "gates" via the internet. Now, the role of legacy journalism is to make sense of the massive sea of information that's available to the audience. We verify what information is reliable and then order it so people can grasp it in a useful, meaningful way.
(In a way, it's the difference between going to the supermarket and trying to make a great meal, or going to a great restaurant and having that meal made for you. People don't necessarily have the time, desire or skills to sort through all the food choices out there to make a great dinner. In teh same way, they don't necessarily have the time, desire or skills to sort through the flood of information choices now available, so they go to a media professional for that.)
If journalism is to survive, then it must become a force in empowering citizens to shape their own communities based on verified information. You may learn of something from a tweet, but you find out if it's true and what it could mean from a journalist.
How does mass media stay relevant in an era of niche media? Before we can answer that, let's first explore the Theory of the Interlocking Public. It's the idea that everyone is interested and even expert in something. Niche media exploits this by catering to niche interests. For example, sports people go to ESPN. Gossip junkies go to TMZ. Political junkies go to Politico. MSUers go to The State News.
The theory implies that there are three broad levels of public engagement on every issue; that is, on any given issue, people are members of one of three groups:
The involved public: people who have a stake in an issue.
The interested public: people with no direct role in the issue but who is affected by and responds to the issue.
The uninterested public: pays little attention and will join, if at all, after the issue has been laid out by others.
We are all members of one of these three groups. For example, if the issue was a tuition increase at MSU, the involved public would include students and parents of students. The interested public would include staff, faculty, alumni, and people who will be attending MSU in the future. The uninterested public would include people not in school and/or who don't know anybody in school.
Our challenge is to write stories that may be meaningful and useful to those involved and interested, and interesting and understandable to those who on the surface are uninterested; and to offer a sufficient mix of stories in every newspaper and on every TV newscast that every member of the audience would be interested in at least one of them.
No comments:
Post a Comment