|
Taking the Show on the Road:
Local Television News Anchors
and their Public Appearances
Katherine A. Bradshaw
Bowling Green State
[log in to unmask]
419.874.9756
James C. Foust
Bowling Green State
Joseph P. Bernt
Ohio
Presented to the RTVJ Division of the
Association for Educators in Journalism and Mass Communication,
Kansas City, Missouri, August 2003.
Abstract
Taking the Show on the Road:
Local Television News Anchors and their Public Appearances
By
Katherine A. Bradshaw, James C. Foust, and Joseph P. Bernt
Late news anchors (895) responded (50.39%) to a survey about their
community appearances. Results generally showed homogeneity of views across
gender, race, age and television market size. Nearly all schedule and make
appearances that are covered as news. Younger television anchors and
anchors in smaller markets were more likely to see the ratings implications
of public appearances. These views contrast with those of older anchors who
were more likely to see the community service value. The exceptions
supported Berkowitz's work on news worker socialization. The results
illustrated Bantz's theory of the normalization of conflict between
journalistic norms and business-entertainment norms.
Taking the Show on the Road:
Local Television News Anchors and their Public Appearances
By
Katherine A. Bradshaw, James C. Foust, and Joseph P. Bernt
Local television anchors are regularly seen not only at the news desk but
also at events in the community. Anchors appear, for example, at charity
ski events,[1] Big Brothers/Big Sisters,[2] schools, churches, and civic
organizations.[3] They help raise money for schools[4] and scholarships.[5]
Anchors may speak at leadership conferences,[6] serve as an honorary chair
of an event,[7] and work for breast cancer awareness or attention to the
need for adoptive and foster parents.[8] Viewers, moreover, do not
necessarily have to see the anchors in person at organized events to know
that they were there because the station often covers their community
appearances as news stories. Sometimes, through segments about a specific
disease, for example, anchors even become continuing quasi-spokespeople for
a community cause.[9]
These community appearances, then, can benefit the cause, the anchor's
station, and the anchor personally. The appearance of a high-profile local
television personality helps to draw attention (and money) to a group or
cause, not only directly, but also through the additional publicity from
news coverage of the appearance. The station benefits from promoting its
anchor as a "real person" who is involved in the community and cares,
whether truly or seemingly, about his or her, often adopted, town. Regular
anchor appearances in the community, in fact, are often a keystone of the
station's efforts to promote itself as an active and engaged community
citizen. When its promotions are tied so directly to a single person, the
station's efforts can benefit the anchor personally. The increased
visibility and attendant audience response can put the anchor in a stronger
negotiating position for his next contract or improve her chances of moving
to a larger or more lucrative market.
At the same time, community appearances by anchors can create conflict
between journalistic norms and business-entertainment norms. Community
appearances usually have nothing to do with the anchor's skills as a
journalist and everything to do with the anchor's "star quality," and every
hour spent appearing in public in a setting unrelated to newsgathering is
an hour that is not spent practicing journalism. Thus, community
appearances can place anchors in a position where business or entertainment
imperatives conflict with their journalistic norms. Several researchers
have noted that such conflicts are widespread in local television
newsrooms; Bantz, in fact, theorizes that local television news work
involves a set of practices in which conflict is "routine, everyday,
necessary, valuable, and ordinary" [italics in original].[10]
Various aspects of the conflict have been addressed in popular and trade
literature about television news work. The most famous example of the
conflict breaking out of the newsroom may be Christine Craft who detailed
her fight in her 1988 book, Too Old, Too Ugly, And Not Deferential To Men:
An Anchorwoman's Courageous Battle against Sex Discrimination. A recent
national example was CNN's "zipper" promotional spot for Paul Zahn as host
of a new show "American Morning." For one weekend in January 2002, viewers
heard a male announcer ask, "Where can you find a morning news anchor who's
provocative, super-smart, oh yeah, and just a little sexy?" The word "sexy"
popped up on the screen and viewers heard the sound of a zipper followed by
a cut to Zahn on the set. Among many accounts and comments, Maureen Dowd
wrote about it in The New York Times, and the San Francisco Chronicle
covered it.[11] Most recently, Greta Van Susteren had an eyelift after she
left CNN and before she began at FOX, and then discussed it on the air.[12]
There has been no discussion, however, about public appearances by local
television news anchors in their communities and the conflict with
journalism norms that these may pose. This study examined local television
news anchors' practices and opinions concerning community appearances.
Using a census of evening anchors at network affiliate stations, this study
examined how often anchors make public appearances, the process of
scheduling public appearances, and how public appearances are viewed by
anchors, especially with regard to conflicts with journalistic norms.
Literature Review
Bill Kovach, chair of the Committee of Concerned Journalists, and Tom
Rosenstiel, director of the Project for Excellence in Journalism, have
written that the primary purpose of journalism is to provide citizens with
information so that they can effectively participate in self-governance.
With the input of hundreds of award-winning journalists and United States
citizens, they compiled a list of nine elements that support this primary
purpose:
1. Journalism's first obligation is to the truth. 2. Its first loyalty is
to citizens. 3. Its essence is a discipline of verification. 4. Its
practitioners must maintain an independence from those they cover. 5. It
must serve as an independent monitor of power. 6. It must provide a forum
for public criticism and compromise. 7. It must strive to make the
significant interesting and relevant. 8. It must keep the news
comprehensive and proportional. 9. Its practitioners must be allowed to
exercise their personal conscience.[13]
Kovach and Rosenstiel's list details the highest professional journalistic
standards and also reflects a normative theory of the press that sees
journalism representing the public interest by acting as an adversary to
and monitor of the powerful.[14] Their list, in large part, merely restates
normative principles journalists have embraced for decades.[15] Readers
have been shown to judge newspapers by similar standards.[16]
In television news, however, such long-held journalistic principles often
come into conflict with entertainment or business norms. The report in
Columbia Journalism Review on a five-year study of television news done by
the Project for Excellence in Journalism was titled, "On the Road to
Irrelevance." The report pointed out, among other things, that television
news journalists were increasingly constrained by exigencies of time,
money, and lack of personnel. Enterprise and investigative reporting,
longtime indicators of commitment to quality journalism, the report said,
"have nearly vanished" from television newscasts. "Most news directors say
they want to get back to basics," the report noted, "though after thirty
years of consultants there is confusion about what those basics are."[17]
Although the literature on the conflict between journalistic norms and
business and entertainment norms is not extensive, several studies address
the potential conflict. Berkowitz found that more than two-thirds of all
broadcast news workers said business concerns shaped news
selection.[18] In another study, he found that business values had almost
as much influence as journalistic ideals on journalists.[19] Other
scholars, however, have found that journalism values are more likely to
determine the content of television news programs than either business or
entertainment values.[20] Harmon found that traditional news values –
proximity, prominence, consequence, significance, conflict, and unusual
nature of story – dominated story selection in Cincinnati television, with
routine and the nature of the medium forming a secondary set of criteria
for story selection.[21] It could be argued, though, that these criteria
apply as much to entertainment as to journalistic norms.
Television news workers themselves have been found to be critical of their
own work. Smith found that reporters were more critical of their own
newscast than were producers; news directors were the least critical of
all. Although it does not directly address journalism and
entertainment-business norms, Smith's findings illustrate the conflict. For
example, reporters and producers both agreed that certain television news
stories are covered because they are easy to do "live." In general,
however, he found that those with more power to make a change in the
newscast had less desire to do so. "At each step up the chain of command,
television newsworkers become less critical of their craft," he wrote.[22]
In a reanalysis of the same data, Smith and Becker found some differences
between producers and reporters; however, they concluded that reporters did
not fight producers to maintain journalistic integrity.[23]
Bantz argued that professional journalism norms conflict with entertainment
and business norms to contribute to "the development of organizational
cultures in newswork where conflict is normative, that is, defined as
ordinary and viewed as appropriate…. Consequently, conflictive behavior is
defined as acceptable (i.e., normative) behavior." Further, he argued that
entertainment norms of performance "should mesh with the business norms of
profit in such a powerful way that newsworkers holding professional norms
experience an on-going conflict between entertaining and informing."[24]
Other researchers have found examples of business norms guiding television
reporter's practice. Tuggle found that economic decisions rather than news
values often keep reporters on the scene of news stories longer than
necessary,[25] and both senior reporters and news directors "agree that
'live for the sake of live' takes place with disturbing frequency in the
newsrooms across the nation."[26] Berkowitz found that story selection for
local television news was a group process influenced not just by
journalistic values such as timeliness, significance, interest, and
importance, but also by organizational constraints, the newscast structure,
and story mix.[27] Bantz also argued that reliance on
entertainment-business norms influences journalistic decisions by making
the audience—not journalism professionals—the ultimate decision-makers.
Thus, if the audience does not agree with journalistic decisions and
ratings decline, the television journalists' decision must be changed to
agree with audience opinion.[28]
As Allen pointed out in News Is People, his historical account of the
influence of consultants on local television news, anchors who increase
ratings also increase station revenue because rating points translate
directly to the cost of advertising on the station. Higher ratings mean
advertisers pay more and the station earns more per minute of air time.[29]
This shift in power from newsroom professionals to the audience determined
ratings places television news anchors squarely in the middle of the
conflict between journalistic norms and business-entertainment norms. The
paradox of the role of the most important television journalist, Bantz
notes, is apparent in the range of names given to it: "anchor," "reader,"
"managing editor," "talent," and others. Whatever he or she is called, the
on-air person is judged by entertainment norms such as attractiveness,
dress, age, timing, vocal quality, and other performance or delivery
criteria. She must make no errors, and be in control, friendly, and
natural:[30]
Thus the on-air person, the most publicly visible member and in the most
professionally prestigious position (in U.S. television news), is likely to
be judged on entertainment norms. Yet the on-air person works in a news
organization where professional norms are typically held. Thus the on-air
person illustrates the ongoing conflict between the two sets of norms:
should she strive to meet professional norms and satisfy journalistic
colleagues or strive to meet entertainment norms and satisfy management?[31]
Bock has also pointed out the inherent conflicts in the professional life
of television news anchors. She noted that many anchors feel they must be
willing to compromise traditional journalistic values to survive in the
industry and that these traditional values provide little guidance on
matters of appearance and other "non-journalistic" requirements of
broadcast news.[32]
Anchors are clearly important to viewers. Allen described the mysterious
nature of the bond between viewers and anchors, and noted that no one knows
why viewers who have put one anchor on top then switch to watching another
anchor.[33] Although some scholarship suggests anchors may not be as
critical to ratings as other factors,[34] some members of the audience
choose a news broadcast based in large part on the newscaster. This choice
is often based on whether viewers "identify" with an anchor.[35] Viewers
told Shosteck in the early 1970s that some anchor traits, including voice
inflection, speech pattern, professionalism, personal appeal, and
appearance, were important.[36] Cathcart found that most viewers want the
anchor to be knowledgeable and experienced because that lends the anchor
credibility.[37] Additionally, viewers perceive differences among anchors
based on attractiveness, but they do not perceive differences among anchors
based on other attributes such as knowledge, trustworthiness, dress, or
making difficult material understandable.[38]
All of this is important from a business perspective because a larger
audience means higher ratings and more income for the television station.
According to Wicks, in 1989 newscasts could account for half of corporate
profits at local television stations.[39] Television news managers
generally believe news anchors are critical to business (ratings) success
and that they must have both the skills of a journalist and the sometimes
less-tangible traits that attract viewers. Allen found that general
managers and news directors at television stations want news anchors to
have journalistic and on-camera skills, and that the anchors must maintain
their presentation skills and increase the broadcast's ratings to keep
their jobs.[40] Becker found that the most desirable candidate for an
anchor job was the person who had increased ratings in the market where he
or she was currently an anchor.[41] Rosenberg reported that television
general managers are highly selective about both the attractiveness and
presentation skills of television news anchors.[42] Turow found that some
general managers believe attractiveness and presentation skills instill
unity and identity in a news program.[43] The importance of the anchor to
the local television news organization is apparent from the complexity of
the hiring process. Becker found that the process of hiring anchors
included not only the news director and general manger but also the program
director, consultants, and station owners.[44]
Although the audience expresses no gender preference for television news
anchors,[45] some research indicates possible differences between male and
female anchors. Engstrom and Ferri reported that 75 percent of women
television news anchors surveyed believed that too much emphasis was placed
on physical appearance.[46] Women television news anchors said they were
judged by appearance, while men were judged for work skills.[47] Women
television news anchors said an overemphasis on physical appearance was a
career barrier, and women anchors perceived more barriers than
men.[48] Women anchors on local television news feel tremendous pressure
to have a certain look, and some of them say the pressure causes so much
stress that it is painful.[49]
Market size can make a difference in values for selecting news content. In
larger communities timeliness is more important and television news editors
are guided more by journalism values, while in smaller communities
proximity is more important.[50] Confirming the importance of the value of
timeliness in large markets, Carroll found more breaking news in larger
markets.[51] Additionally, larger markets put greater emphasis on ongoing
issue stories (policy disputes) and news of crime, fires, and accidents.[52]
Research on the opinions and behavior of local television news anchors
about the community appearances they make contributes to the accumulating
body of research on newsworkers and the journalism and business dialectic.
Examining television news anchors' opinions and behaviors may reveal what
they do and how they feel about public appearances on behalf of the local
station. Anchors as newsworkers are important to study because they must
perform their job at the intersection of these conflicting sets of
values. This study is the first to examine local television news anchors'
community appearances on behalf of their station, and did so by addressing
the following research questions.
Research Questions
RQ1: How many appearances do anchors make each week?
RQ2: Who controls anchors' community appearances?
RQ3: How do television news anchors view their community appearances?
RQ4: How do the appearances affect the anchors' journalistic duties?
Method
The researchers sought responses from all the late evening news anchors at
ABC, CBS, and NBC affiliate stations. The late evening news anchors were
chosen because they are usually the station's "top" anchors, even though in
many cases these same anchors may work earlier shows as well. The
affiliates of the older, more established networks were chosen because in
aggregate these stations' news programs have higher ratings than
independent stations and those affiliated with FOX or other smaller networks.
The network-affiliated stations were identified using the web site
tvjobs.com, which provides a listing of stations and web addresses by
market. Most stations have a two-person news anchor "team" (almost always
including one man and one woman), although some have a single anchor. The
evening anchors were identified from each station's web site, and a
catalogue of all anchors and their e-mail addresses was created. Anchors
and e-mail addresses were verified by telephoning each station, yielding a
total of 976 anchors in the 211 metered television markets. Attempts were
made to telephone each anchor; 895 were reached and told—either directly or
via voice mail—that they would be receiving an e-mail survey. Three anchors
refused to take the survey, and one said his station had a policy
prohibiting anchor participation in surveys.
An e-mail with a hotlink to the web page containing the survey was then
sent to each anchor. Responses, which were in the form of an e-mail sent to
a dedicated survey account, were gathered between September 26, 2002, and
February 28, 2003. At least three attempts were made to re-contact anchors
who did not initially respond to the survey. Completed surveys were
received from 451 anchors, yielding a response rate of 50.39%.[53] Because
a census of all late evening anchors was used, and not a sample, standard
error and confidence level information is not provided. Because of
turnover, all of the anchors contacted and responding to the survey may not
have been anchors for the entire time of the study; however, all of the
anchors contacted were anchors for at least part of the time the survey was
in the field.
Results and Discussion
Local television news anchors regularly make appearances in the community
representing the station. There is typically no charge for these
appearances, nor are there constraints on the appearances. Anchors said
that they believe that the appearances help their careers and improve the
show's ratings; in fact, most of them said that appearances are critical to
maintaining ratings. At the same time, the anchors viewed the appearances
as useful to the community, benefiting worthwhile organizations and
bringing attention to important issues. Many times the anchor's community
appearances are covered as news stories. Very few anchors said that they
spent more time on community appearances than on gathering news.
The 451 anchors responding to the survey work in 183 of the 211-metered
markets. Most of the markets from which there were no responses were
markets smaller than 150.[54] Most respondents were Caucasian (86.3%), and
only slightly more were male (53.9%) than female (46.1%). Their ages ranged
from 22 to 63 years with about half younger and half older than 40. Most
have a bachelor's degree (73.5%) and some advanced education (17.3%). The
respondents' anchor experience ranged from less than one year to more than
20 years.
RQ1: How many appearances do anchors make each week?
Nearly all of the anchors (80.9%) reported, "I regularly make appearances
in the community representing the station." Nearly half of them do so once
a week (49.0%), while 23.1% make an appearance twice a week, and 10.6% make
an appearance three times a week.
Anchors from the smallest markets (163 and smaller) are less likely to make
appearances, but still more than half of them do so (55.3%). Those with the
fewest years of experience (4 or fewer) as an anchor were less likely to
regularly make appearances; however, more than half of them do so
(62.5%). Community appearances representing the station are clearly a part
of nearly all local television news anchors' jobs.
RQ2: Who controls news anchors' community appearances?
Most anchors (83.6 %) said station management had no guidelines about their
appearances; most (76.1%) said station management did not have to approve
their appearances. Women (30%), however, were more likely than men (18%) to
say that the station must approve their public appearances; and younger
anchors (25 years and younger) were more likely to say that their
appearances had to be approved (47.8%).
Money is not a factor in anchors' appearances. Nearly all anchors appear in
the community for free (98.7%), and stations do not charge fees for the
appearances either (100.0%).
Most anchors (78.9%) schedule and arrange their own appearances, at least
in part. However, 19 % of anchors work in cooperation with other station
personnel to schedule appearances. The appearances of 21% of anchors are
arranged exclusively by other station personnel. Most anchors said that
community appearances are just part of a television news anchor's job
(94.7%). Apparently they have accepted the responsibility of community
appearances, and most reported the appearances are expected by station
management (82.5%). Respondents also said that most other anchors make
public appearances (76.5%).
Apparently anchors are largely in control of their own community
appearances. Most stations do not have guidelines for public appearances,
and most anchors do not have their public appearances vetted by station
management. It is, however, more likely that management requires approval
for appearances by younger anchors and women.
RQ3: How do television news anchors view their community appearances?
Anchors view their community appearances as benefiting their own careers
and the communities served by their news organizations. With little
variation by age, race, gender, or years anchoring, anchors reported that
community appearances help their careers (79.4%), help their communities by
drawing attention to important issues (87.3%), and benefit worthwhile
organizations (97.1%).
A majority (69.2%) of anchors said that they believe community appearances
improve ratings, and in fact nearly as many (63.0%) contended that
community appearances are critical to maintaining ratings. The youngest
anchors (25 years and younger) were more likely to believe appearances
improve ratings (82.6%), and the oldest anchors (56 years and older) were
least likely to believe appearances improve ratings (40.9%). Anchors in
larger markets (1 through 20) also were less likely to believe that
appearances are critical to maintaining ratings (45%).
In contrast to the sizable numbers who said that they believe appearances
do an organization some good or benefit the community, only about a third
(29.6%) said they believe appearances are aimed at pleasing advertisers.
Younger anchors, those 25 years and younger (65.2%), anchors with less
experience, those who have anchored four or fewer years (47.5%), anchors
from smaller markets, such as 139 through 162 (46.8%), and anchors who are
women (36.5%) were all more likely to report that public appearances are
aimed at pleasing advertisers.
RQ4: How do the appearances affect the anchors' journalistic duties?
While only a few anchors said that they spend more time on appearances than
on news gathering (14.9%), half said that they feel pressured to complete
tasks unrelated to show content (50.7%). Slightly more than half of the
anchors said that they perform more tasks unrelated to show content (53.9%)
than they formerly did. Anchors with more experience – 20 years or more
- (61.9%), anchors who are older – 48 years and more - (62.9%), and
anchors who make more appearances – 4 or more - (60.6%) were more likely to
say they now perform more tasks unrelated to show content.
Nearly all anchors said that they believe the news broadcast would be
better if they could spend more time working on it (89.5%), and most
indicated that they think the broadcast would be better with more people
working on it (83.0%). A high percentage (82.5%) of anchors said their
community appearances are sometimes covered as news stories by their station.
Conclusion
This study contributes to the accumulating body of research on the
journalism and business dialectic by examining television news anchors'
opinions and behaviors concerning the public appearances they make on
behalf of their local stations. This work contributes base line data on the
number of appearances made by anchors, reveals anchor acceptance of
appearances, and generally illustrates the consistency of opinion among
anchors across age, gender, race, experience, and market size.
Because the data for this study was generated from a census, these results
are not generalizable to the top local anchors or to anchors in general.
However, these results do represent the views of the 50 percent of anchors
who responded to the survey. The views of anchors who did not respond, of
course, may differ.
This information is most valuable when viewed in light of Bantz's work
about conflict in television news organizations. The data collected in the
present study suggest that what appears from the outside to be a potential
source of conflict between journalistic norms and business-entertainment
norms causes little or no consternation for anchors. Indeed, we would argue
that public appearances by anchors—which have little or nothing to do with
practicing journalism—are so ingrained in television news that anchors see
them as an integral part of being a broadcast journalist. This supports
Bantz's contention that conflict is an everyday part of broadcast news; it
is, in fact, so routine that most anchors do not even seem to feel it.
The structural imperatives of the broadcast news business help to dictate
this routinization of concepts that one might expect to create conflict.
Management expects community appearances by anchors; nearly all other
anchors do them; and they are believed to improve ratings. Thus, anchors
make community appearances in part because such appearances are a
requirement of the job. However, the anchors also see community
appearances as having the potential to advance their careers—either at the
current station or in a new market. Anchors also see community appearances
as a benefit to their communities and to worthy community organizations.
These findings support what Bock called the "moral righteousness" anchors
associate with their community work. "While they are being sold as
celebrities, they have come to see themselves as a new kind of community
leader," Bock wrote. "Instead of finding problems with their role as
consumer products, they seem to want to be conscientious products."[55]
Although the data generally showed remarkable homogeneity of views across
age, sex, experience, and market size, some differences did emerge, and
those differences point to the conclusion that over time anchors learn to
live with the conflicts in the journalism-business dialectic. Younger
anchors, those with less experience, those from smaller markets, and women
generally see public appearances as aimed at pleasing advertisers. Younger
anchors and anchors in smaller markets are more likely to see the ratings
implications of public appearances. These less altruistic views contrast
with those of older, experienced anchors who are more likely to see the
community service value of personal appearances. These differences might
well come from the fact that younger, less experienced anchors – following
Berkowitz – have not yet been socialized to the norms of broadcast
journalism and are thus likely to hold more cynical views about the
motivations underlying public appearances. Or it could be that the
difference is explained by different practices in very small markets, or a
different relationship between station workers and their communities.
Even if anchors seem largely unaware of it, this conflict between
journalism norms and entertainment-business norms merits further
examination. Future research should explore the tasks that news anchors
perform, and how those tasks affect the show's journalistic content. The
ethical considerations of public appearances also could be studied.
Clearly, public appearances are an important and accepted component of TV
news anchors' jobs, and researchers need to study this and similar routine
intersections between business, entertainment, and journalism norms more
closely. The normalization of conflict, as embodied in anchors' public
appearances, apparently contributes to the neglect of journalism. Public
appearances might not just be taking the show on the road, they might be
helping to take it on the road to irrelevance, as the Columbia Journalism
Review suggested in its 2002 report on findings by the Project for
Excellence in Journalism.
NOTES
[1] http://www.thewmurchannel.com/wmur/825783/detail.html (August 2,
2002).
[2] http://www.wtnh.com/Global/story.asp?S=27139 (August 8, 2002).
[3] http://www.11alive.com/whatson/whatson_article.asp?storyid=12855
(August 9, 2002).
[4] http://www.krqe.com/Global/story.asp?S=174461 (August 8, 2002).
[5] http://www.wpri.com/artman/publish/newwpri/stationKaren.html
(August 8, 2002).
[6] http://www.wtvq.com/bios/gromko.html (August 6, 2002).
[7] http://www.wsls.com/aboutus/bios/johncarlin.htm (August 6, 2002).
[8] http://www.wtol.com/Global/story.asp?S=50326&nav=5UaiOFN40DrI
(August 6, 2002).
[9] http://www.wtol.com/Global/story.asp?S=50326&nav=5UaiOFN40DrI
(August 6, 2002).
[10] Charles R. Bantz, "News organizations: Conflict as a crafted
cultural norm," Communication 8 (1985): 240.
[11] "Paula Zahn and the Zipper Promo: How Low Do We Have to Go?"
Media Report to Women 30, 1 (Winter, 2002): 4-5.
[12] "A Lift in the Ratings," People, 30 December 2002, 132.
[13] Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel, The Elements of Journalism (New
York: Crown, 2001), 12-13.
[14] Wilbur Schram, Responsibility in Mass Communication (New York:
Harper and Row, 1957); Frederick Siebert, Theodore Peterson, and Wilbur
Schram, Four Theories of the Press (Urbana, Illinois: University of
Illinois Press, 1956).
[15] David Weaver and G. Cleveland. Wilhoit, The American Journalist
in the 1990s: A preliminary report of key findings from a 1992 national
survey of U.S. journalists (Arlington,Virginia: Freedom Forum, 1992); David
Weaver and G. Cleveland Wilhoit, The American Journalist: A portrait of
U.S. news people and their work (Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University
Press, 1991).
[16] George A. Gladney, "How Editors and Readers Rank and Rate the
Importance of Eighteen Traditional Standards of Newspaper Excellence,
Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly 73, 2 (Summer, 1996): 319-331.
[17] "On the Road to Irrelevance," Columbia Journalism Review,
November/December 2002, 89.
[18] Dan Berkowitz, "Work Roles and News Selection in Local TV:
Examining the Business-Journalism Dialectic," Journal of Broadcasting &
Electronic Media 37, 1 (1993): 67-81.
[19] Dan Berkowitz, "Assessing Forces in the Selection of Local
Television News," Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 35, 2 (1991):
245-251.
[20] See K. Tim Wulfemeyer, "A content analysis of local television
newscasts: Answering the critics," Journal of Broadcasting 26, 1 (Winter,
1982): 481-486; J.R. Dominick, A. Wrutzel, and G. Lometti, "Television
journalism vs. show business: A content analysis of eyewitness news,"
Journalism Quarterly, 52, 3 (Spring 1975): 213-218; and K. Tim Wulfemeyer,
"Developing and Testing a Method for Assessing Local TV Newscasts,"
Journalism Quarterly 59 (Spring1982): 79-82.
[21] Mark D. Harmon, "Mr. Gates Goes Electronic: The What and Why
Question in Local TV News," Journalism Quarterly 66 (Winter, 1989): 857-863.
[22] Conrad Smith, "News Critics, News Workers and Local Television
News," Journalism Quarterly 65 (Summer, 1988): 344.
[23] Conrad Smith and Lee B. Becker, "Comparison of Journalistic Views
of Television Reporters and Producers," Journalism Quarterly 66 (Winter,
1989): 793-800.
[24] Bantz, "News organizations," 240-241.
[25] Charles A. Tuggle, "Media Relations During Crisis Coverage: The
Gainesville Student Murders," Public Relations Quarterly (1991, Summer):
23-28.
[26] C.A. Tuggle and Suzanne Huffman, "Live News Reporting:
Professional Judgment or Technological Pressure? A Survey of Television
News Directors and Senior Reporters," Journal of Broadcasting and
Electronic Media 43, 4 (Fall 1999): 492.
[27] Dan Berkowitz: "Refining the Gatekeeping Metaphor for Local
Television News:" Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 34, 1 (1990):
55-68.
[28] Bantz, "News organizations," 235.
[29] Craig M. Allen, News Is People: The Rise of Local TV News and the
Fall of News from New York (Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University Press, 2001):
189.
[30] Bantz, "News organizations," 236.
[31] Bantz, "News organizations," 237.
[32] Bock, Mary Angela, Smile More: A Subcultural Analysis of the
Anchor/Consultant Relationship in Local Television News Operations, (Drake
University Master's Thesis: Des Moines IA, 1986).
[33] Allen, News Is People, 187-206.
[34] Carolyn A. Lin, "Audience Selectivity in Local Television
Newscasts," Journalism Quarterly 69, 2 (1992): 373-382; and Larry L.
Burris, "How Anchors, Reporters and Newsmakers Affect Recall and Evaluation
of Stories," Journalism Quarterly 64 (Summer-Autumn, 1987), 514-519.
[35] See Wulfemeyer, "Interests and Preferences"; A. Rubin, E.M. Perse
and R. Powell, "Loneliness, Parasocial Interaction and Local Television
News Viewing," Human Communication Research 12, 2 (Winter1985), 155-180; R.
Houlberg, "Local Television News Audience and the Parasocial Interaction,"
Journal of Broadcasting 28, 4 (1984): 423-429; M. Levy, "Watching TV News
as Parasocial Interaction," Journal of Broadcasting 23, 1 (1979), 69-80;
and A. Powers, "The Changing Market Structure in Local Television News,"
The Journal of Media Economics 3, 1 (Spring,1990), 37-55.
[36] H. Shosteck, "Factors Influencing Appeal of TV News
Personalities," Journal of Broadcasting 18, 1 (Winter, 1973-74): 63-71.
[37] William L. Cathcart, "Viewer Needs and Desires in Television
Newscaster," Journal of Broadcasting 14, 1 (1969-70), 55-62.
[38] Churchill Roberts and Sandra H. Dickson, "Assessing Quality in
Local TV News," Journalism Quarterly 61(Summer, 1984), 392-398.
[39] R. H. Wicks, "Segmenting Broadcast News Audiences in the New
Media Environment," Journalism Quarterly 66 (Spring, 1989), 114-120.
[40] Craig Allen, "Priorities of General Managers and News Directors
in Anchor Hiring," Journal of Media Economics 8, 3 (1995), 111-124.
[41] Lee Becker, "Personnel Practices in U.S. Commercial Television,"
Rundfunk und Fernsehen 33, 3-4 (1985), 525-533.
[42] H. Rosenberg, "The Cult of Personality," American Journalism
Review, September 1993, 18-19.
[43] J. Turow, "Local Television: Producing soft news," Journal of
Communication 33, 2 (Spring, 1983): 111-123.
[44] Becker, "Personnel Practices."
[45] K. Tim Wulfemeyer, "The Interests and Preferences of Audience for
Local Television News," Journalism Quarterly 60 (Summer, 1983), 323-328;
Susan Whittaker and Ron Whittaker, "Relative Effectiveness of Male and
Female Newscasters," Journal of Broadcasting 20 (1976), 177-184.
[46] Erika Engstrom and Anthony J. Ferri, "From Barriers to
Challenges: Career Perceptions of Women TV News Anchors," Journalism and
Mass Communication Quarterly 75, 4 (Winter, 1998), 789-802.
[47] Anthony Ferri and Jo E. Keller, "Perceived Career Barriers for
Female Television News Anchors," Journalism Quarterly 63 (Autumn, 1986),
463-467.
[48] Anthony Ferri, "Perceived Career Barriers of Men and Women
Television News Anchors," Journalism Quarterly 65 (Fall, 1988), 661-667, 732.
[49] Tracy B. Jensen and Elizabeth B. Hindman, " Looking the Part: U.
S. Anchorwomen as 'other,'" paper presented at Association for Education in
Journalism and Mass Communication, Washington, D.C., 2001.
[50] J. K. Buckalew, "News Elements and Selection by Television News
Editors," Journal of Broadcasting 14, 1 (Winter, 1970), 47-54; and "A
Q-Analysis of TV News Editors' decisions," Journalism Quarterly 46 (Spring,
1969), 135-137.
[51] Raymond L. Carroll, "Content Values in TV News Programs in Small
and Large Markets," Journalism Quarterly 62 (Winter, 1985), 877-882.
[52] Raymond L. Carroll, "Market Size and TV News Values," Journalism
Quarterly 66 (Spring, 1989), 49-56.
[53] Although a total of 466 responses were received, 5 were not used
because they could not be definitively confirmed as coming from a qualified
anchor's e-mail address.
[54] There was no response from 1 market in the top 50 markets. There
was no response from 3 markets between 50 and 100. There was no response
from 5 markets between 101 and 150. There was no response from 19 markets
between151 and 208. There were no responses from any anchors in markets
209-211.
[55] Bock, 154.
|
