"We Media and Democracy" - Elsie Williamson

A key interest in my opinion when it comes to the way in which news content is delivered is the culture of the popular broadcasting website YouTube. I find that it is more likely that I receive news from the people I am subscribed to /following on social media or in my suggested videos and gaining interest, than if it was from watching BBC news, reading an article from The Guardian or listening to the radio. The reason I have this viewpoint is because usually through YouTube the subscribers of the youtubers feel more connected to the creator and will therefore delve more into the news story to find the whole situation of the story, due to the curiosity of what the well-known YouTube creator stirs by talking about the subject. This then may lead to their subscribers wanting to find out more ruling them to large news corporation which has an unbiased view on it, such as, the BBC. Positives of this are shown through Philip DeFranco who creates videos informing his viewers on the news daily in an unbiased fashion and then follows it with his opinion. The positives of his format of telling the news is that he keeps it interesting but enables the viewer to still have their own view as well as seeing it with an open mind. Furthermore, another creator who shares his views on subjects in a positive way is Tyler Oakley. Although the content he creates may vary he is passionate about serious issues involving the LGBT+ community which he shares with his audience and tries to raise money for.  This is shown through him raising money for The Trevor Project an organisation for the prevention of suicide among LGBT youth in which last year he raised $532,224. As well as him discussing the Anti-LGBTQ+ Massacre which killed 49 people this year in June. However, the negatives of receiving news content from these YouTube bloggers is that a majority of the time the views that they have on the news story is heavily biased. Furthermore, with this broadcasting website being available to anyone worldwide, in a range of languages and free it means that people of any age can access it. Linking this to the reception theory this means it can easily leave an impression on young children who use YouTube who without realising it will pick the dominant reading of the text they are provided with. Therefore, this means that they may not have a complete view of the real situation but just have the story that the creator has made. Keemstar (DramaAlert) is an example of this bad impact due to his heavily biased reporting of the news causing him to be seen in a negative light, as well as unreliable. He is known for click baiting and using other Youtubers for attention. This lead to people recommending a youtuber Scarce who is apparently unbiased. But although him unbiased is positive, due to the way he presents it being boring and vapid it makes his audience unable to connect to the story, which causes him to fail to be on the same level as Philip DeFranco. A major story circulating the web was an accusation assumed about youtuber Marina Joyce that something was happening behind the scenes due to the way that she was acting. It is still unclear into who started this story but it quickly grabbed people’s attentions. Some accusations were that she had been kidnapped, that she has been on drugs or that her boyfriend had taken advantage of her and was controlling her YouTube channel to get money. However, I learnt that all of these were false from an article from The Guardian a trustworthy news organisation.  This shows the use of the Reception theory with people following the negotiated reading with them taking in the source that they have been given but then creating a number of things not originally mentioned or modifying it in a way to what they think has happened. But this story went viral online and got to the point hash tags were trending worldwide online such as #savemarinajoyce. The build up around this news story began from teenagers but then got found by well-known internet stars and eventually the police. This shows the power of the internet. This raises the question of whether the broadcasting website YouTube is reliable. In some cases it would be depending on the channel delivering the news. For instance, both BBC News and Channel 4 have YouTube accounts which upload regularly. However, the subscribers and view count compared to that of a well-known youtuber overshadows them completely. Although they may not be as reliable the intrigue and interest they create makes it more fascinating to watch. This is due to the newer generation watching YouTube more but needing the creators to grab their attention to keep them actively interested. However, due to BBC News and Channel 4 being large corporations they do not have as much freedom to state their opinion but simply inform us on what is happening in the world. YouTube also enables witnesses of the event to show evidence and upload videos to inform the world on what’s happened. This is often unedited and more brutal to what has happened making it more honest. An example being the video of a black man being shot for not getting his license out quick enough due to the police thinking he was reaching for a gun. With youtubers using the platform not only to share news stories but put their view on it follows David Gauntlett Media 2.0 because it shows that people are becoming more active participants who put their different views across rather than remaining passive. Also, due to it being readily available it means that more people are being informed about the world and what is happening. Which is an improvement from previous generations ignoring the development in technology, taking in just what they were taught but remaining passive due to doing nothing with what they had read. However, a negative is the introduction to Internet 3.0 with cookies tailoring to our interests which could distract/ simply not show us the important news occurring and happening. Research that I have collected shows that the older generation are very similar in what they look for in the news, such as, US and UK politics, education, Brexit, Syrian Civil War. While when comparing this to the younger generation (my classmates mainly 17 years old) the subjects did vary considerably more. For example, someone chose the categories Football, UK and Sport while another chose Music, Entertainment and Animals. Therefore, this shows how much more diverse the people of my generation are when it comes to the topics they’re interested in. This can be seen as a positive with any type of person being able to take advantage of the technologies available and learn things that they wouldn’t have been able to do in the past. However, another viewpoint is that it is causing them to be unaware of things happening politically which will impact their future. To conclude, there are still patterns of similarities between each generation. My generation may have the internet which my research says many people get their news from their social media. But the news organisations that they believe to be trustworthy are nearly the same as the previous generation. With a majority of people believing that the BBC and Channel 4 are to be the most reliable. One key reason for the BBC being well known to be trustworthy is due to the fact that they are funded by the taxpayer meaning that they need to show an unbiased view on the news story making them sound established. Meanwhile, Channel 4 in some people’s views seems to show more care for each story showing them as more independent. This implies that it is simply the format that we receive the news that has changed, such as, the older generation watching the programs and listening to the radio. While the younger generation seeing them on their social media platforms and via YouTube. The younger generation is more active and ready to share news due to the technologies we have and the freedom it gives us to share our view.