The erosion of news values at the hands of the people
I came across this article by SFGate.com editor Vlae Kershner, which discusses the role page views play in determining news value/judgment on websites.
On the one hand, the great revolution of e-mail, blogs, etc is that other readers can recommend articles. The other great thing about the internet is that out of touch editors can know what readers are recommending to one another. This is a powerful tool, which can help journalists reconnect with their communities and allow the public a role in setting the agenda.
However, we live in a world of representative democracy. I don't particularly like that fact, especially when it's large, wealthy interest groups, not regular citizens, who play the largest role in selecting our leaders. There is, though, a solid theory behind this form of government.
Alexander Hamilton said the "voice of the people has been said to be the voice of God; and however generally this maxim has been quoted and believed, is not true in fact. The people are turbulent and changing...; Their turbulent and uncontrolling disposition requires checks."
The gate keeping function of the press, in part, and often imperfectly, plays this role. But this role helps ensure that the public doesn't only receive the information they want, but the information journalists believe they need and should want. That's why politics, foreign affairs and international news, never very popular subjects, are considered to have higher news value that entertainment coverage.
The problem with allowing the audience to select news value is that they'll select only what they want to know, not what they should know. To quote Kershner, "topics that receive large numbers of page views include sex, local crime, weather and pro sports." Readers already can gravitate to these stories in the newspaper.
But when I pick up the New York Times, I don't necessary care about Social Security reform, the budget deficit, or the War in Iraq (The first article I read yesterday was about Apple's new iPod and its lower price). But while I was reading those articles that really interested me, the ones I'll pass along to friends, I read others that didn't interest me, but which are none the less important. Understanding the budget deficit and Social Security, though it makes for some very dry reading, is essential to my ability to wisely select leaders to represent me. It's also vital to my ability to express my disapproval when they fail to do so.
If we allow readers to select the news value of a given story, and we burry those that don't immediately interest them, the informed, ruling class will increasingly be separated from the average citizen. Furthermore, the ruling class, influenced by special interests, will be more free to conduct themselves without fear of censure from their constituents.
At that point, any democratic value in allowing readers free reign to determine news value will be lost. Even in an era of citizen media, journalists' gate keeping role plays an important function, which is why the role of citizen journalism should be to supplement and work alongside citizen media, not to replace it if the ultimate aim is a stronger democracy.
On the one hand, the great revolution of e-mail, blogs, etc is that other readers can recommend articles. The other great thing about the internet is that out of touch editors can know what readers are recommending to one another. This is a powerful tool, which can help journalists reconnect with their communities and allow the public a role in setting the agenda.
However, we live in a world of representative democracy. I don't particularly like that fact, especially when it's large, wealthy interest groups, not regular citizens, who play the largest role in selecting our leaders. There is, though, a solid theory behind this form of government.
Alexander Hamilton said the "voice of the people has been said to be the voice of God; and however generally this maxim has been quoted and believed, is not true in fact. The people are turbulent and changing...; Their turbulent and uncontrolling disposition requires checks."
The gate keeping function of the press, in part, and often imperfectly, plays this role. But this role helps ensure that the public doesn't only receive the information they want, but the information journalists believe they need and should want. That's why politics, foreign affairs and international news, never very popular subjects, are considered to have higher news value that entertainment coverage.
The problem with allowing the audience to select news value is that they'll select only what they want to know, not what they should know. To quote Kershner, "topics that receive large numbers of page views include sex, local crime, weather and pro sports." Readers already can gravitate to these stories in the newspaper.
But when I pick up the New York Times, I don't necessary care about Social Security reform, the budget deficit, or the War in Iraq (The first article I read yesterday was about Apple's new iPod and its lower price). But while I was reading those articles that really interested me, the ones I'll pass along to friends, I read others that didn't interest me, but which are none the less important. Understanding the budget deficit and Social Security, though it makes for some very dry reading, is essential to my ability to wisely select leaders to represent me. It's also vital to my ability to express my disapproval when they fail to do so.
If we allow readers to select the news value of a given story, and we burry those that don't immediately interest them, the informed, ruling class will increasingly be separated from the average citizen. Furthermore, the ruling class, influenced by special interests, will be more free to conduct themselves without fear of censure from their constituents.
At that point, any democratic value in allowing readers free reign to determine news value will be lost. Even in an era of citizen media, journalists' gate keeping role plays an important function, which is why the role of citizen journalism should be to supplement and work alongside citizen media, not to replace it if the ultimate aim is a stronger democracy.
<< Home