This paper was presented at the Association for Education in Journalism and
Mass Communication in San Francisco August 2006.
I am not the author. If you have questions about this paper,
please contact the author directly.
If you have questions about the archives, email rakyat [ at ]
eparker.org. For an explanation of the subject line, send email to
[log in to unmask] with just the four words, "get help info aejmc," in the
body (drop the "").
(Oct 2006)
Thank you.
Elliott Parker
====================================================================
Abstract for
Selling News:
Behind the Content of Cable and Broadcast News Morning Shows
Through content analysis of the three broadcast networks and
two leading cable news channels, this study: (1) examines how
entertainment fits into the overall content of the morning news
shows, (2) evaluates ownership patterns as it relates to this
content, and (3) examines the policy implications of these news
decisions for the long-standing social responsibility theory of the
press. The study identifies clear differences in the practices of the
major broadcast versus cable programs and suggests an update to
social responsibility theory.
American television's morning news programs have held flagship
positions for their affiliated news divisions since the debut of the
format in 1952. While they have had occasional baffling detours from
that path, including the role of J. Fred Muggs, the Today Show
chimpanzee who co-hosted with Dave Garroway, and Willard Scott's drag
appearance as Carmen Miranda, the programs have played a prominent
role in their respective news divisions, especially in times of major
breaking events like the tragedy of September 11, 2001. But on a
typical day, entertainment-related content makes up a substantial
part of the fare of the morning programs and it is important to
consider the content of those shows and what that might say about how
news values are manifesting in today's television journalism.
Moreover, as the morning news programs become an increasingly
important part of the economic picture for their parent networks, the
role of the owners in determining content is an increasingly
significant question.
Through content analysis of the three broadcast networks and two
leading cable news channels, this study: (1) examines how
entertainment fits into the overall content of the morning news
shows, (2) evaluates ownership patterns as it relates to this
content, and (3) examines the policy implications of these news
decisions for the long-standing social responsibility theory of the
press. The study identifies clear differences in the practices of the
major broadcast versus cable programs.
Review of the Literature
A recent article speculating about the possible move of NBC Today
Show anchor Katie Couric to CBS News as its main anchor noted: "It
may be a considerable adjustment to accept Couric as chief anchor for
every future crisis after nearly 15 years as morning cheerleader,
fluff flinger and eager promoter of every movie, book or TV show the
stars come by to plug" (Hartford Courant, 2005). Clearly, while
there is respect for the journalistic skills of the people who front
the shows, the morning programs are not considered examples of the
best and brightest in network news content.
That may be an outgrowth of the pressures brought to bear on those
high visibility programs. Daily decisions about morning news show
content are made in an atmosphere of competing tensions, including
the drop in the loyalty of viewers, especially young ones, to
routinely follow the news versus pressure from mega-corporations to
consolidate opportunities for corporate synergy. The question of the
relevancy of "the news" – at least as defined by the American
mainstream media – has become a topic of increasing interest for
media critics. Researchers including Mindich (2005) have noted the
disengagement of young media consumers for following the news. In
general, daily mainstream media usage is steadily declining for
newspapers and television news programs (The state of the news media
2005, 2005). The dramatic decline of commercial radio news
availability has also been well chronicled. In this atmosphere,
national television news outlets have stepped up their efforts to
hang onto those viewers who are still there. That struggle is evident
in the news organizations' attempts to balance entertainment versus
"hard" news in their morning programs.
But are those efforts, which often include increased coverage of
lighter fare like celebrity and entertainment news, on target? The
DDB Worldwide marketing firm conducted lifestyle surveys from 1993 to
1998, querying respondents about their television viewing habits and
comparing the value they placed on "hard news" versus entertainment
content. During combined morning timeslots, including "wake up" and
"breakfast," viewers ranked "information" as the most important goal
they had in making viewing decisions (Putnam, 2000, p. 227, citing
DDB Worldwide surveys). It would follow, then, that morning news
shows should feature a healthy dose of information content over
entertainment if they are going to give viewers what they say they want.
Even veterans of the morning show host chair have raised concerns
about the increasing trend toward entertainment-heavy content over
more traditional news fare. Former longtime Today host Jane Pauley
recently said, "We're driving people away from the news. I think
we're eating our young" ("Larry King Live," 2005).
Effects of vertical integration on media content
The concept of "vertical integration" assumes that media
outlets can be most cost effective if one company controls the
production and distribution stream up and down the line. For example,
the theorists believe that corporations that own movie studios,
theatre chains and distribution companies are most able to capitalize
on opportunities in the marketplace.
Whether this admittedly efficient business model has ramifications
for news editorial content selection is a matter of much speculation,
but relatively little hard data. Only a few scholars have looked at
aspects of this question. A study by the Project for Excellence in
Journalism (2001) found that network morning news programs devoted an
average of 34% of their time to "selling viewers something – a book,
a movie, a kitchen or garden gadget, a website, other network
programs or a segment later in the show." That study noted that each
of the morning programs exhibited examples of "corporate synergy"
where products owned by the parent company were touted by the related
media outlet, but where the relationship was infrequently disclosed.
Another study found that the morning programs, on average, fill their
daily news hole at least 20% of the time with entertainment and
sports topics, that the entertainment products covered are more
likely to have been produced by the networks' parent companies or a
corporate sibling, and that the coverage of entertainment topics is
almost certain to be favorable (Cleary & Adams, 2005).
Other researchers have posed similar questions about the
potential influence of corporate relationships on editorial
content. Wood, Nelson, Cho and Yaros (2005) found local network
affiliate news programs were susceptible to corporate and commercial
influence in topic selection. Williams (2002) examined how network
nightly news shows covered the industries and specific products of
companies within their corporate family. Results showed that
vertically integrated media companies were likely to cover the
various products of their related companies more frequently and more
favorably than those with no financial stake in the content. Jung
(2001) found that CNN, a subsidiary of Time Warner, showed a
favorable bias toward covering that company's movie products after
the companies merged. Additionally, the results showed that in the
wake of the merger, stories on Time Warner movies increased while
coverage of other movie-producing companies decreased. Also studying
the impact of "corporate synergy," although in a non-broadcast media
format, Lee and Hwang (1997) found that Time magazine was more likely
to provide favorable coverage of its new owner's entertainment
products after the Time-Warner merger in 1989.
As Hamilton (2004) noted, ownership of news organizations by
companies with interests in related businesses may influence
editorial content. Indeed, news workers may fall into "boosting" the
parent company's other ventures:
Companies that provide entertainment programming as
well as news may be tempted toward self-promotion. As
soft news becomes prevalent in many news venues,
companies may prefer to promote their own entertainment
products during news program coverage of television,
music and movies. Self-dealing may also arise from the
increasing trend toward vertical integration in information
industries (p. 26).
It is this temptation to at least partly fill the news hole with
self-serving promotional content that suggests an abrogation of the
long-established social responsibility of the press.
Social Responsibility and Influence Theory
For a half century, Siebert, Peterson and Schramm's (1956) social
responsibility of the press has been the dominant model under which
the American media has claimed to operate. The authors argued that
because the news media is the only industry singled out for
protection in the Bill of Rights, it must meet a higher level of
obligation to the American public. The authors maintained that within
American society, everyone who has something significant to say
should have the opportunity to express it in the media. Further, they
said, there is a responsibility on the part of corporations, the
community, consumers, practitioners, and professional organizations
to insure that access remains open to a diverse group of people and
views. In his essay on social responsibility theory, Peterson wrote:
"It accepts the role of the press in servicing the economic system,
but it would not have this task take precedence over such other
functions as promoting the democratic processes or enlightening the
public" (p. 74). Despite criticism that the theory is outdated
(Nerone, 1995), it has dramatically influenced thinking about the
proper role of the American press and has presumably affected news
content decision making for more than 60 years.
Nerone, et al (1995) argued however, that "…The press driven by
capital cannot be expected to provide a thorough critique of the
economic system or to offer alternatives because it is not 'free from
control or domination' by capital…Watchdogs do not bite their owners"
(p. 26). They also make the point that the original social
responsibility theory downplayed the significance of conglomerate
media ownership on influencing the gatekeeping function and,
ultimately, content in the media. Those criticisms, it would seem,
illustrate the potential for abuse of the social responsibility
function in the name of "corporate synergy."
Meyer and Zhang's (2004) influence model also has relevance to this
study. The authors argue that quality journalism begets a circular
process in which journalistic credibility and societal influence in
turn results in increases in circulation and profitability for
newspapers. That process, they believe, ultimately feeds the growth
of quality content. In his book, The Vanishing Newspaper (2004),
Meyer writes that journalism must find ways to improve its quality
and the resulting support of the public: "Earning that reputation
may require the creativity and the courage to try radical new
techniques in the gathering, analysis, and presentation of news. It
might require a radically different definition of the news provider's
relationship to the community, as well as to First Amendment
responsibilities" (p. 46).
Dual responsibility model of the press
Previous analysis of how the broadcast networks program their
morning news shows indicates that there is a significantly greater
likelihood that they will feature their own parent company's products
as part of the entertainment content (Cleary & Adams, 2005). In
fact, a full third of their entertainment coverage is produced by the
parent company or its subsidiaries. Anywhere from 14% to 30% of the
total stories were entertainment or sports related. Additionally, the
entertainment content was prominently featured with placement in
earlier segments, was more highly produced with customized sets and
additional resources, more live interviews, and was favorable in 89%
of the cases with 84% of them covered by the show anchors.
In light of these findings, Cleary and Adams (2005) suggested a
revision of the social responsibility theory – dubbed the dual
responsibility model – which acknowledges the reality of bottom-line
considerations in choosing editorial content on the morning news
programs. This model (Figure 2) delineates a place for fiscal, as
well as social, responsibilities in news decision making. However,
the previous study only looked at broadcast network morning shows.
This study expands that premise, allowing more fully for today's
media environment which includes myriad news outlets and the
cable-created concept of a 24-hour news cycle.
Broadcast versus cable news business model
There are some fundamental differences in the business approaches to
broadcast versus cable news that makes the upstart cable entities
unique. Cable tends to have a much more specific audience. As CNN
founder Ted Turner noted, a small, but targeted audience can
ultimately be more valuable. When approaching potential advertisers,
he would argue that his audience, while fewer in number, was superior
in intelligence (Whittemore, 1990). In effect, Turner believed that a
strictly news audience was more "upscale" and therefore a better cost
per thousand value to advertisers. Further, cable channels can rely
on a base of subscriber fees, unlike their network counterparts. As a
result, cable news departments are offered a certain freedom from the
strict ratings pressure felt by the networks. As Turner noted:
It's not right when all of television's money comes from advertising.
It puts too much pressure on the ratings. Then when you get to the news
part of the programming, you could be asked or told to do things that don't
really make good journalistic sense. You get out of the news business and
into the ratings business (p. 304).
This study expands the previous one by factoring in the two leading
cable news morning programs, CNN's American Morning and FOX and
Friends. By adding in the cable programs, the authors show that the
decisions made when producing these shows – especially those related
to entertainment content – can differ considerably between the
broadcast networks and their cable counterparts.
Method
A total of 961 morning news programs from ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN and FOX
were coded for this project during a one-month period which coincided
with the Fall 2004 sweeps as defined by Nielson Media Research. That
time frame, November 4-December 1, 2004, was selected because it
traditionally represents a major thrust for holiday entertainment
product promotion and it is a time when the networks might be
especially conscious of promoting their own programs in order to
influence audience viewing habits.
The unit of analysis was individual stories within each two or
three-hour program. Each story was coded for whether it focused on
primarily a news, entertainment or sports topic. Those that were
determined to be entertainment or sports related were coded for
additional details, including the format of the piece, whether they
contained content related to the network's parent company, and if the
treatment of the subject was primarily positive, neutral or negative.
Six communication graduate students from a major U.S. university
performed the coding. The students were trained with the coding
instrument and their work was checked by the authors.
"Entertainment" stories were defined as those where a specific
product or event was promoted. Examples included cooking segments
based on new cookbooks, concert series based on new CD releases, and
interviews with stars of upcoming movies. "News" was broadly defined
as those stories which did not specifically address or promote an
entertainment product such as a book, movie, or CD. "Sports" stories
were confined to those dealing with a sporting event or issue, but
where the specific content was not to overtly sell a product. In
several instances, there was some overlap between categories. For
example, the Michael Jackson trial involved a celebrity and might
initially be considered entertainment. However, because the story
was about his legal troubles, and not a new CD, music video or other
entertainment product, it was coded as news. There was no delineation
between "hard" and "soft" news in the news category. So, for example,
Julia Roberts giving birth to her twins, though not hard news, was
none-the-less categorized as "news" since it was merely a report of
an event, not a promotion of a specific movie.
Ten percent of the programs were double-coded for purposes of
calculating intercoder reliability. Using Cohen's kappa, overall
reliability was .79. According to Banerjee et. al., cited in
Neuendorf (2002), Cohen's kappa levels of .75 and above indicate
excellent agreement beyond chance.
Findings
When it comes to coverage of the entertainment and sports content
offered by the leading American broadcast news operations, it may
indeed be a case of the cable channels offering somewhat more "fair
and balanced" coverage – but only to a certain extent. Generally, the
cable programs were more likely to focus on straight news during
their morning programs, less likely to feature their parent
companies' products, and more likely to offer critical coverage of
this content.
This study examined four research questions:
R1: How do cable programs compare to network programs in term of
traditional news versus entertainment content?
The two cable morning news programs contained more straight or
informational news content than their broadcast network counterparts.
(See Table 1.) During the one-month period examined, CNN was the
channel most likely to focus on "hard news" with 91% of its total
stories coded as "news" and only 9% of the total content related to
entertainment or sports. The results were statistically significant
at the p<.05 level.
Table 1: Entertainment/Sports Content Compared to News Content
Program
Total Percentage of Entertainment/Sports Segments
Total Percentage of News Segments
ABC's Good Morning America
31.2% (n=236)
68.8% (n=756)
NBC's Today Show
20.6% (n=144)
79.4% (n=697)
FOX and Friends
14.3% (n=148)
85.7% (n=1,028)
CBS's The Early Show
14.0% (n=112)
86% (n=796)
CNN's American Morning
9.0% (n=134)
91% (n=1,487)
In terms of raw story count, CNN had a significantly higher number
of stories during the one-month period studied, with a total of
1,487. However, it is important to remember that CNN's American
Morning is a 3-hour program and, with the exception of NBC's Today
Show, the others are 2-hour programs.
R2: Do the five channels provide more prominent coverage of "in
house" products over competitors' entertainment products?
The three network morning programs were significantly more likely to
feature entertainment content owned by their parent companies than
were the two cable news channels. (See Table 2.) The three network
programs clustered together with roughly a third of their total
entertainment content devoted to products produced by some subsidiary
of their parent companies. At 27.6% of its total entertainment
content, CNN trailed slightly with its coverage of Time
Warner-produced products. FOX was the least likely to feature
content owned by its parent company, NewsCorp. The results were
statistically significant at the p=.05 level.
Table 2: Ownership of Entertainment/Sports Content
Network
Percentage of Entertainment/Sports Content Owned by Parent Company
Percentage of Entertainment/Sports Content Owned by Competitors
CBS
36.0%
63.9%
ABC
32.6%
67.3%
NBC
32.3%
67.6%
CNN
27.6%
72.3%
FOX
19.7%
80.2%
Overall, the five channels were most likely to focus their
entertainment-related coverage on television programs. (See Figure
1.) When the two cable networks were excluded, the results were even
more clear: the broadcast networks were highly likely to feature
television programs (29.9%) as the center of their entertainment
coverage. The second most likely genre for entertainment-related
coverage was books with 16.9% of the overall coverage of the five
channels focusing on books.
Figure 1: Type of Entertainment/Sports Content on Morning News Programs
The two cable programs were more likely to cover
entertainment-related content produced by a competitor. (See Table
3.) FOX and Friends was the least likely to cover entertainment
content produced by its parent company with about 20% of its content
related to NewsCorp-owned products.
Table 3: Ownership of Entertainment/Sports Content
Morning News Program
Percentage of Entertainment/Sports Content Owned by Parent Company
Percentage of Entertainment/Sports Content Owned by Competitors
CBS's The Early Show
36.0%
63.9%
ABC's Good Morning America
32.6%
67.3%
NBC's Today Show
32.3%
67.6%
CNN's American Morning
27.6%
72.3%
FOX and Friends
19.7%
80.2%
R3: How do cable channels compare to network programs in terms of
self-promotion of parent company products?
One of the ways television producers indicate a particular
significance to a story is through the use of treatments such as
custom sets or special locations. During the period studied, CBS's
The Early Show was most likely to offer a special set for its
entertainment content, doing so 35.2% of the time. The result was
statistically significant at the p=.05 level.
The format of the coverage, whether a product demonstration, a live
performance, a satellite interview, etc., is another indicator of the
relative importance a producer assigns to a topic. Across the five
channels, the most common type of coverage was interviews with tape
inserts which made up nearly 18% of the coverage. However, among the
five channels, the most common type of coverage varied with
demonstrations, interviews with tape inserts and satellite interviews
being the most popular choices among the various individual channels.
(See Table 4.)
Table 4: Format of Entertainment/Sports Coverage on Each Channel
Story Format
NBC
CBS
ABC
CNN
FOX
Demonstration/presentation
22.3%
14.1%
6.2%
0%
7%
Interview with VO/SOT
23.0%
40%
6.7%
12.2%
15.9%
Satellite interview
11.9%
1.9%
3.7%
3.0%
16.8%
Package
8.9%
7.6%
1.8%
8.1%
9.7%
Live performance
7.4%
8.6%
2.8%
0%
1%
R4: Are cable and network channels significantly different in how
they treat entertainment versus hard news content on the morning news programs?
Each of the five channels was likely to give "favorable" coverage to
the entertainment content they featured. Overall, 85.8% of the total
coverage was coded as "favorable" with 7.6% coded "balanced" and 6.6%
coded as "unfavorable." The Disney-owned ABC program, Good Morning
America, the show featuring the largest percentage of entertainment
content, was also the program that was the least likely to provide
critical coverage of that content. (See Table 5.)
Table 5: Content Characterized By Channel
Morning News Program
Favorable
Balanced
Unfavorable
ABC's Good Morning America
82.6%
1.6%
3.3%
CBS's The Early Show
77.6%
6.2%
9.8%
NBC's Today Show
74.3%
6.2%
7.6%
FOX and Friends
63.5%
7.4%
5.4%
CNN's American Morning
58.9%
14.1%
3.7%
However, those positions shifted somewhat when the ownership of the
topic of the entertainment content was cross tabulated against
whether the content was coded as "favorable," "balanced," or
"unfavorable." (See Table 6.) In that case, NBC's Today Show was the
most likely to give favorable coverage to its own products, followed
by CNN, ABC, FOX and CBS. It should be noted that while NBC gave
favorable coverage nearly 90% of the time to its parent
company-produced entertainment products, CBS, the channel least
likely to give favorable coverage to Viacom-owned products, still did
so 73% of the time.
Table 6: Ownership of Topic of the Entertainment Story * Portrayal of Content
Ownership of the Topic
Favorable
Balanced/Neutral
Unfavorable
Universal (NBC)
89.5%
4.8%
5.7%
Time Warner (CNN)
88.2%
7.1%
4.7%
Disney (ABC)
83.3%
5.8%
10.8%
NewsCorp (FOX)
76.2%
16.7%
7.1%
Viacom (CBS)
73.2%
14.6%
12.2%
Overall, the most likely single subjects of an entertainment-related
story on these five channels were writers, followed by actors,
critics and musicians. Magazine writers and chefs were also
frequently featured. (See Table 7.) However, there were significant
variations in the choices of the five channels as to the kind of
entertainer they tended to favor. Those preferences often appeared to
align with the emphasis of their corporate parents as addressed in
the discussion below.
Table 7: Interview Subjects By Channel
Subject of Interview
NBC
ABC
CBS
CNN
FOX
Total
Writer
22
6
11
18
49
106
Actor
26
22
20
3
7
78
Critic
4
1
2
30
4
41
Musician
9
12
6
0
0
27
Magazine Writer
2
1
1
17
3
24
Cook/Chef
8
3
6
0
0
17
Director
1
2
1
0
1
5
Producer
1
0
1
1
0
3
Other
56
41
37
9
22
165
Discussion
As this study indicates, the morning news programs are not entirely
about news, and not incidentally about entertainment. In many cases,
they illustrate the concept of corporate synergy in action. Whether
they are equally demonstrating the social responsibility function of
the press is up for discussion.
The study found that American cable news channels offer a higher
"news count" that's not just attributable to the longer run time for
the programs. These programs are part of companies that do not have
entertainment content as their primary primetime focus and,
therefore, they do not have the same incentive for promoting
company-sponsored entertainment. CNN has recently picked up on this
distinction and is using the tag line "Where real news makes the
difference" to promote American Morning. They can make that claim
because their audience is highly targeted to be receptive to "all
serious news all the time." Meanwhile, media attention has focused on
the fact that Good Morning America has been steadily gaining on the
Today Show in the ratings, largely by emulating its relatively high
level of entertainment-related content. Because the two cable news
networks do not include entertainment content in their primetime
schedule like the three broadcast networks, it might not be
surprising that the cable news shows tended to feature less
entertainment coverage of television programs. However, the cable
news networks do include a substantial number of regularly scheduled
news-related "specials" such as "CNN Presents," exclusive interviews
through venues like "Larry King Live" and other scheduled in-depth
treatments of topics. So, there is opportunity for these kinds of
programs to be promoted through entertainment segments in the morning
news show in the same way the broadcast networks promote their shows.
Further, the parent companies of CNN and FOX – Time Warner and
NewsCorp – do own movie studios and numerous other entertainment
entities, so the difference cannot be fully explained by the fact
that they don't feature traditional "entertainment" programming on
their own air.
There also appears to be some additional level of restraint in
covering parent-company affiliated entertainment products on the part
of the two cable channels that is not as evident with the three
broadcast networks. For example, FOX's parent company NewsCorp is a
considerable player in the entertainment field. It owns, among other
properties, 20th Century Fox, HarperCollins Publishers, and numerous
subsidiaries, along with several sports teams. As a result, there
are ample opportunities for the cable channel to feature these
entities in their coverage. Likewise, Time Warner, the owner of CNN,
is a major owner of movie studios including Warner Brothers,
entertainment cable channels including HBO, and numerous
entertainment-oriented magazines such as Sports Illustrated and
Entertainment Weekly. Yet, both channels feature less entertainment
news of their own products than their network counterparts. Are the
cable networks making a deliberate effort to offer more "real news"
because of their targeted audience in their morning shows as CNN
claims or are they choosing to push their own parent company's
products in more subtle ways by highlighting seemingly news-related
items including news magazines and non-fiction books?
Each channel seemed to have its own preference for the type of
entertainment content featured on its air. For example, FOX was far
and away the most likely to feature writers in its coverage. Its
parent company, Rupert Murdoch's NewsCorp, began as a newspaper
empire and currently owns substantial properties in the book
publishing industry, including HarperCollins Publishers and its
approximately 40 related imprints. CNN, owned by Time Warner, a
major magazine publisher, was the most likely to feature magazine
writers or critics who often worked for magazines, in its
entertainment coverage, even touting that relationship as part of its
coverage. NBC and ABC, owned respectively by GE and Disney, are both
substantially vested in television and movie studio production. They
were the most likely to feature actors in their entertainment-related
content. CBS, owned by Viacom, a widely diversified company including
television production companies, cable channels, movie studios and
publishing companies, reflected that diversity in its coverage of
entertainment topics.
As the Project for Excellence in Journalism study noted, not only
are the programs covering products produced by their parent
companies, but they are not always specifically acknowledging
it. While more high profile links were often recognized with
language such as "[Name of the artistic work] was produced by the
[production company], which is owned by [name of parent company],
which owns this network," they were not necessarily consistently
noted, especially in the case of book publishers and musical releases.
Limitations and Suggestions for Further Research
As with any study, this one has inherent limitations. The study
makes a distinction between information presented to inform versus
information presented to promote. However, within the strictly
informational content, no value judgment is made as to whether the
news content is "hard," "soft" or even remotely of any worth.
Further, there is no data from other time periods with which to
compare these findings. It would be helpful to know if the current
state of entertainment versus news coverage is representative of the
long-haul or whether it shows a modern shift in focus toward
"lighter" fare. It would also be helpful to trace the promotion of
in-company owned products over time through the media to help answer
the question of whether "corporate synergy" has grown as media
consolidation has grown. An analysis of the content of the adjacent
commercial breaks could also yield interesting findings regarding
overt sponsorship of news media.
Conclusion
The most significant question arising from this study may center
around how the press chooses to spend its goodwill capital with the
public. If the public trusts the media to give it an objective view
of the news that is not unduly influenced by ownership patterns,
these results could seriously question whether the U.S. broadcast
media is meeting that obligation. Specifically, does the fact that
morning show news coverage is likely to focus on the parent company's
products, and that it is likely to be favorable toward those
products, have an impact on the long-term ability of the press to
retain public trust? In Last Rights: Revisiting Four Theories of the
Press, the authors wrote: "The power of the press does not consist of
promoting specific ideas or images; the power of the press is the
ability of the major media to be the gatekeepers of the public sphere" (p. 99).
The results of this study highlight the differences between cable
and broadcast. While all five morning news programs feature a
relatively high percentage of favorable entertainment content, the
cable programs are more likely to feature non-promotional news
content, less likely to feature the products of their parent
companies, and more likely to cover the entertainment products of
their competitors. From their inception, the cable news channels have
differed from the broadcast networks in that CNN was created as part
of an overall marketing strategy that put forth a 24-hour news cycle
to attract a very specific demographic/psychographic that would
respond to "live and late breaking" news. This represents a shift
from the traditional model of an "all purpose" network that attempted
to provide all things to all people. And, by extension, this resulted
in a shift from the traditional social responsibility role of the
news media to an acknowledgement of a dual responsibility to both the
viewing audience and stockholders. That is not to say that either
cable or broadcast networks have shunned their obligations to the
viewers, but perhaps the cable operations offer a more open
acknowledgement that they are serving two masters.
The dual responsibility model offers a more realistic reflection of
the reality of the current media marketplace in the United States. It
is not intended to imply that the high-minded principles of social
responsibility theory should be replaced, but rather that they may
need to be updated to more accurately reflect the realities of
today's media landscape.
References
Cleary, J. & Adams, T. (2005). "The Family Business: Entertainment
Products and the Network Morning News Shows." Presented to the
Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication Annual
Conference, San Antonio, TX, August 2005.
DDB Worldwide, Retreived 6/29/2005 from the World Wide Web at
http://www.bowlingalone.com/data.php3. [The DDB Life Style data, made
available through the generosity of DDB Worldwide of Chicago,
Illinois, who retain appropriate rights, including copyright, on
these data, while allowing fair use for scholarly and academic
research. Copyright 1975-1998 by DDB Worldwide.]
Hamilton, James. T. (2004). All the news that's fit to sell: How
the market transforms information into news. Princeton, N.J.:
Princeton University Press.
Hartford Courant (2005, Dec. 2), Can Couric lead the news at CBS?
Gainesville Sun, 2A.
Jung, J. (2001). The influence of media ownership on news coverage: A
case of CNN's coverage of movies. AEJMC annual meeting. Washington,
D.C. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 459 505).
Lee, T.ien-tsung, & Hwang, Hsiao-Fang. (1997). The impact of media
ownership: How Time and Warner's merger influences Time's content.
Paper presented to the Magazine Division, AEJMC 1997 Annual
Convention, July 30-Aug.2, Chicago.
Meyer, P. (2004). The vanishing newspaper: Saving journalism in the
information age. Columbia: University of Missouri Press.
Meyer, P. & Zhang, Y. (2002). Anatomy of a death spiral: Newspapers
and their credibility. Paper presented to Association for Education
in Journalism and Mass Communication's Annual Conference, Miami, FL.,
August 10, 2002.
Mindich, D. T. Z. (2005). Tuned out: Why Americans under 40 don't
follow the news. New York: Oxford University Press.
Nerone, J. C. ed. (1995). Last rights: Revisiting Four Theories of
the Press. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
Neuendorf, Kimberly. (2002). The Content Analysis Guidebook. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Pauley, Jane. (2005, June 12). CNN's "Larry King Live" on June 12, 2005.
Pew Center for the People and the Press (2000). Internet sapping
broadcast news audience. Retrieved from
http://people-press.org/reports/print.php3?PageID=202
Project for Excellence in Journalism. (2001, Nov. 19) "Before and
after: How the war on terrorism has changed the news agenda."
Available at:
http://www.journalism.org/resources/research/reports/agenda/default.asp.
Retrieved: 3/6/2005.
Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of
American community. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Siebert, F.S., T. B. Peterson, & W. Schramm. (1956). Four theories of
the press. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
The state of the news media 2005: An annual report on American
journalism. (2005). Journalism.org. Retrieved from
http://www.stateofthenewsmedia.org/2005/narrative_newspapers_audience.asp?cat=3&media=2
Whittemore, H. (1990). CNN: The inside story. Boston: Little, Brown and Co.
Williams, D., (2002). Synergy bias: Conglomerates and promotion in
the news. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 46(3), 453-72.
Wood, M. L., M., Nelson, M.R., Cho, J., & Yaros, R.A. (2005).
Tonight's top story: Commercial content in television news.
Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 81(4), 807-822.
1 The coded programs included 17 episodes of NBC's Today Show, 19
episodes of ABC's Good Morning America, 20 episodes of The Early
Show, 20 episodes of CNN's American Morning and 20 episodes of FOX and Friends.
|
