Recently,
I downloaded the BBC news app to encourage myself to pay attention to the news
more – prior to the app, I did not use my phone to monitor news updates which I
have now come to realise is very useful. As a result, I now use the ‘Yahoo!’
app on my phone to quickly check any important news stories whilst on the go.
Back to the BBC News app: I began by selecting as many interesting topics as I
could, because I’m not really into one specific type of news, and as a result,
I often read articles and headlines from a wide range of topics. I chose topics
like the Syrian Civil War, the Migrant Crisis, the UK, Health, Sport and the World.
Before
using the BBC news app, I only ever got my news, 95% of the time, from the
‘Yahoo!’ website. In the beginning this was due to my email address being with ‘Yahoo!’,
then slowly I began to use the news on the site as a source of information
about affairs around the world. My interest in a variety of topics stemmed from
‘Yahoo!’ because the website has articles from all sorts of topics. I did
sometimes question the reliability of some of the news, but not in the sense
that I thought they were feeding me with false information, for two reasons: 1)
Because I knew that some of the articles are written by external journalists,
or freelance journalists who may not necessarily work for ‘Yahoo!’ and
therefore do not damage the site’s reliability. And 2) because I used the
Hall/Morley model, where I would either accept the dominant reading, or
possibly disagree with some points and use the negotiated reading. Sometimes
however, I used the oppositional reading, where I completely disagreed with the
preferred reading and came up with my own opinion. I liked that the articles
provoked me to come up with my own opinions and perhaps even challenge the
preferred reading of an article. I felt that if I gathered my information from
a source that I completely agreed with 100% of the time, I would not be using
my own thoughts and feelings to come up with opinions about matters happening
around the world. It’s no surprise to people that I like having opinions about
things; engaging in conversation about certain topics, at times, can be very interesting
as hearing others views as well as expressing your own to others can be
relaxing and conscience-clearing. After downloading the BBC news app, I added a
wide range of topics so it would feel more like ‘Yahoo!’ with a variety of news
stories - Making sure it felt more like the news I was used to, helped me feel
comfortable with the articles I was reading as well as the app.
Another
reason that I gain 95% of my worldly news info from just one source is because,
well it’s not actually all from one
source. Like I previously mentioned, many of the articles are created by
freelance journalists who have no obligations to abide by ‘Yahoo!’s political
views (if they have any) and also have some freedom to be more opinionated
about certain topics, like a tabloid. That’s another thing - I like stories
with a bit of flare because again, it challenges me to come up with my own
ideas about the subject and either agree or disagree with the article. Whereas
an informative, straight-to-the-point news story can be at times, a little
boring, in my opinion. However, some
stories, such as the Calais Migrant Crisis, should not be written with a large
amount of the writer’s opinions because it’s a sensitive topic where people
might be offended, and serious situations such as the Migrant Crisis deserve to
be given truthfully and not dribbled with opinions. The same can be said for
articles about the Government and affairs going on within Parliament – topics
that are considered quite serious amongst the general public tend to be more
informative because journalists don’t take the risk of adding their own opinion
in case of a large public-backlash. These more serious topics also tend to be
written by ‘Yahoo!’ journalists for that exact reason; they are employed by
Yahoo and therefore have to abide by their rules when writing about certain
things. This balance is well maintained on the ‘Yahoo!’ news stories which is a
large contributing factor as to why I use ‘Yahoo!’ as my main source of news.
My other 5% I get from either the
BBC news channel on the TV, or the Derbyshire Times, both I which I access
rarely. This is mainly due to my lack of interest in reading, and how usually
news on the TV is very informative which like I mentioned previously, I can
find quite boring at times. I do however still access the TV news on rare occasions
as depending on the situation, I may wish to find out more about a particular news
story, as the television offers more in-depth information about news. I also
may access the Derbyshire Times if my mum buys the paper, I sometimes take a
quick look through as the local news can also be somewhat interesting. But it
genuinely only depends on whether or not my mother buys the paper or not, as I
will not go and buy the paper myself as again, I’m not an avid reader and will
only look at something if it catches my eye.
In
terms of how people access news nowadays, it does differ between age groups,
however it’s not ‘the average’ of how everyone within that age group receives
their news, but from my findings, I can see that the younger generation tend to
gather their news from either social media or online newspapers. This may be
due to the ‘technology-age’ that the younger generation is growing up in; where
checking your social media is a part of your daily routine. The working
generation have a tendency to get their news from newspapers, news apps, online
newspapers, radio and the television. This might also be linked with the
massive advancements in technology within industry, where almost all jobs have
some form of technology linked with them. Therefore the working generation also
have grown used to receiving their news from online newspapers, though as their
generation grew up with the TV providing the news as well as physical papers,
they also lean towards usage of papers and the TV. However, due to the limited
amount of time people have and how quickly the public wish to indulge
information, news apps on phones have seen a massive growth in popularity as it
allows people to quickly check the news during their break. The older
generation have a tendency, (again
this is not an accurate representation of the entire generation) to favour
physical newspapers, the radio and television. The reason for this may stem
from the fact that the news, for a long time, has been told on the TV, as well
the radio and in the paper. As the older generation did not grow up with the
new advancements that are being made, I feel they’re less likely to try and
learn how to use the internet, news apps and social media in order to get
something (the news) they can already get from the TV, radio and the paper.
Nice one, Dan. Really interesting read. I agree with everything!
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure this counts as one of your two replies as it is actually just talking to yourself.
DeleteThat was a really good point you made Mr Welch. Dan is sure to listen.
DeleteA good read Dan. Well done for linking it to theorists such as Hall/Morley. It is interesting that you find opinion pieces more engaging than report pieces. Perhaps, like you say, they at least provoke discussion and invite you to take a position but do you think sometimes they are given too much emphasis and the more shocking they are (such as Katie Hopkins and the like...) then the more likely they are to be read/shared and their views or their misrepresentation of an issue become more mainstream? Does this damage our understanding of an important issue if we do not get the counterbalance of a more reasoned (if a bit boring) recounting of the details?
ReplyDeleteAs for the generational shift in news consumption that you comment on, what do you think could be the impact of this? Is there a danger that everyone retreats into circles of their own interest rather than engaging in society-wide issues/viewpoints?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThank you for your swift, yet thought-provoking response Mr Welch. To answer your questions: When looking at controversial figures, such a Katy Hopkins, you are correct in saying that their stories are more likely to be read; as they are indeed controversial (which people like). Which can sometimes not be a positive thing as like you mentioned, a more neutral view, like that of a regular journalists’, would be more benefitting to allow readers to have all the facts before coming up with an opinion. In my own opinion, I do not see Katie Hopkins as a journalist, as she uses certain parts of stories and facts to suit her own agenda and get across her own views, rather than the whole story.
DeleteHer views are often seen as heavily controversial, but she would not receive the attention she does if she did not present some truth that the audience agrees with, as there are many bloggers and YouTubers out there who have equally as controversial views as her, but she uses her status and her renown for speaking her mind (and perhaps what many others think but do not say) to her advantage in order to talk about subjects that may seem somewhat rude, and even taboo. But once again; if nobody agreed with her, she would not be successful. From speaking to others I have gathered that her bluntness is sometimes needed, and is often what many members of the public think also. For instance, the people I spoke to said that they agreed with what Hopkins said about the McCann’s - Hopkins has shared her views on the subject on twitter and said that Kate and Gerry McCann "didn't deserve £11million of our cash to look for Maddie." She also said “If you really must blame someone, then Kate and Gerry are right there in front of you.”…“Show me a family from a council estate that left their child alone to go out eating and drinking who have been lauded with such support and the protection of the state.” She added: “The McCanns put their own children in harm’s way. Those kids were in danger. Because of their parents ... ““Maddie wasn’t lost because someone took her. She was lost because she was left to be found."
At first these views seem harsh but it’s clear, from whom I’ve spoken to, that she is not alone in her view points. However, to refer back to your original question, no I do not think figures like Hopkins, aswell as others, overshadow the actual state of affairs as like mentioned, I and others, do not think that Hopkins is a journalist and therefore cannot be relied upon to present all the facts that we would seek from a news story. Therefore the two cannot be compared as both are viewed differently; one for provocative views to perhaps challenge the reader, and the other for a clear list of information regarding a certain situation.
To answer your second question, I do not think there is a danger as although everyone has their own interest about what they wish to find out (Where we the audience choose what news to look at), the fact that certain age groups tend to use certain types of media to access their news, does allow for society-wide issues to be recognised. As certain types of news are presented in different medians, for instance informative news tends to be the main type of news used on TV and Radio, in my opinion - Whereas online articles can have a wider variety of news, including opinion articles and the likes. In my eyes though, all news platforms are gradually becoming more alike in terms of the type of news they present. This ‘news convergence’, I like to call it, is evident with the growing number of guest editors and speakers (who will come with different opinions and viewpoints) on TV news as well as the radio, as well as the increased inclusion of opinion articles on news-apps as well as in newspapers. (As opposed to the straight-to-the-point informative articles) This news convergence is a good thing I think, as it will allow society to still access the news in the fashion that they desire, but also provide them with the information necessary to be involved in society-wide issues and viewpoints.
There certainly is a news convergence happening alongside technological convergence. Even a leading big media app such as the BBC's pretty much has every area covered from correspondent reports, issue-based analysis, global language variants of their content to interactivity with citizen journalism. Clearly, established media organisations are learning from the innovative upstarts in social media and adapting their model accordingly. Others are unsure how much to change as do they risk just becoming generic?
DeleteEqually you have a lot of collaboration going on between organisations such as Buzzfeed (who previously specialised in '20 things to do with lard' style posts to actual investigative reporting alongside organisations such as the BBC. Vice magazine have also branched out into news and even documentary making. It all makes for a fast-moving, vibrant but confusing picture. I feel sorry for anyone who may be planning to write a Media Studies textbook as surely a lot of it will be out of date by the time it went to print.
On the Katie Hopkins issue, I agree with you to an extent. Yes, I'm sure she's not the only one who thinks that way and expresses these thoughts in a very direct manner and most people wouldn't call her a journalist although the differences between a reporter and commentator are becoming more and more blurred. I actually think her (and others like her) business model is based around shock tactics. Say something that you know a lot of people will be angry about and get attention; get invited onto TV programmes etc as a result. She also rides the fine line between controversy and actual incitement to violence in a way which could be dangerous. When she wrote comparing refugees to cockroaches and calling on gunboats to be used on migrant boats she or, at least, her editors at The Sun, must've known the historical connotations of this. As you say, she is not the only one you does this and it appears quite a successful tactic. You may find this article interesting about Donald Trump's use of Twitter. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jul/31/trash-talk-how-twitter-is-shaping-the-new-politics?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
Good points Dan, I sometimes find myself being an oppositional reader as well, and with my preferred news reading only being one or two sources, I am also not a very active reader either. Here's an interesting I read in my own personal research about how we should be more active as news readers and not accept the first news stories that are thrown at us! https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/jul/12/how-technology-disrupted-the-truth
ReplyDeleteI agree with you about creating your own opinion on topics and different matters as I think it is an important aspect in anyone's life to have your own personal views rather than just being "fed" information by a possibly bias opinion. I also don't find myself getting news from TV, as you said before you can tailor your interests on apps such as Yahoo! and BBC news whereas on the TV you cannot personalise what information is given to you.
ReplyDeleteWhich app would you consider more trustworthy, Yahoo! or BBC and why?