People like to read things they can easily engage in and understand. Therefore, it's difficult to present complex political, economic, and social issues in a way that's digestible to a large number of people. Perhaps this is the reason for the new trend in news agencies, according to James Fallows in this article, to focus on giving people news they want to read instead of news that should be reading (i.e. serious, unbiased news stories, fully analyzed and discussed). Busy people don't have time to read long, involved news stories, and, really, how many people need or care to know their news to that level of detail anyway? News agencies are businesses too and need to cater to their consumers accordingly.
And so was born the "infotainment age": think flashy sensationalism and stories about animals and babies doing weird things. Infotainment certainly delivers the light, stimulating stories that attract people's attention span. However, does it cover what really matters?
I think current events, local and wordly, do matter for the average person. The connection, though, is often not emphasized in reporting. People care about things they have a stake in, but the news often fails to communicate why things matter. I don't know if backing away from 'accountability' journalism is the right reaction to a loss of public interest in the news. Rather, I think news agencies need to put more focus on showing the significance of their reporting instead of switching to frivolous stories.
Fallows predicts the future direction of mainstream media will continue down the infotainment path, while "worthy reporting" may be relegated to news agencies funded by "local volunteer efforts [and] donations by philanthropists...Forces already pulverizing American society into component granules will grow all the stronger, as people withdraw into their own separate information spheres."
Wishing there was more demand for analysis and synthesis in the news :-/
No comments:
Post a Comment