Content-Type: text/html

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
<a href="/cgi-bin/wa?LOGON=A3%3Dind0610E%26L%3DAEJMC%26E%3D8bit%26P%3D42084%26B%3D--%26T%3Dtext%252Fplain%3B%2520charset%3Diso-8859-1" >[log in to unmask]</a> 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.