Slashdot Mirror
The New Mediascape
These kids devouring information online are re-working the mediascape in cyberspace, creating an enormous generational information divide. Although we often talk of technology in sweeping terms, when it comes to real-world changes, technology-driven changes are highly selective. They sweep away some forms of media like a tidal wave, and inexplicably leave others standing unchanged. In the case of commecial broadcast news, dying for years, the Net is polishing it off.
A new study by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press documents two significant trends: Internet news is becoming ever more mainstream, yet growing numbers of Americans are losing the news habit altogether. Fewer people say they enjoy following the news regularly, at least as news is traditionally defined; more than half pay attention to national news only when something important is happening. More Americans than ever watch the news with remote control in hand, ready to flee stories they consider boring or irrelevant. This finding underscores the importance of that little wireless zapper, proving it to be one of the most political pieces of technology ever.
Regular viewership of network news has fallen from 38% to 30% in the past two years, while local news viewership declined from 64% to 56%. Yet fully one in three Americans go online for news at least once a week, compared to 20% two years ago. And 15% say they receive daily news reports from the Net, up 6%.
Among younger, better-educated American news consumers, the Internet's impact is even more dramatic. Many more college graduates under 50 hit the Net daily for news than regularly watch a nightly network newscast. In fact, the Pew survey finds that people who are interested in the news and go online tend to watch less TV news all the time (The rise of Net news and related formats have less impact on non-broadcast news, apparently. The Pew Center found little evidence that Net news significantly drives down regular use of cable news, daily newspapers or radio news.
It stands to reason, though, that as many of these traditional news media appear on the Net and Web themselves, their use among younger Americans is also likely to decline.
The survey underscores the impact of two powerful factors that drive Net news: interactivity and the rise of Open Media news outlets.
Younger Americans who've grown up using interactive technologies -- the zapper, Sega and Nintendo systems, cable channels, the Net -- are increasingly accustomed to tailoring their news consumption: they want information of particular interest to them, at the times they choose to receive it. They demand the right to alter the media they receive. Older Americans raised on passive, pre-interactive media -- papers, newsmagazines, TV news that offer few choices and little control -- are much more likely to stick with traditional news. Thus, the across-the-board aging audiences of TV, newspapers and many magazines.
The growth of Net news has had a stunning impact on the way Americans, particularly those with access to technology, get information on business and financial matters. According to the Pew study, for active investors -- those who have traded stocks within the past six months -- the Net has largely supplanted traditional media as the leading source for stock quotes and investment advice. Here, the power of Netizens to tailor their own media is enormous and profound. 58% of active traders told Pew pollsters that they have customized stock portfolios online.
This is a staggering statistic -- such portfolios didn't even exist a decade ago. Now they're one of the primary tools for a completely new kind of financial transaction -- e-trading. And a significant percentage of financial sites online also offer breaking news and commentary, reflecting and affecting the markets they deal in.
The generational divide concerning media has been speculated about for years, but it's now quite measurable: Fewer than one in three young adults (31%) say they enjoy keeping up with the news, while more than half (57%) of those age 50 and over say they do. Though younger consumers say they don't like the news as much, they say they do like having a wide variety of information sources from which to choose. Older Americans say they often feel overwhelmed by the increasingly crowded media landscape.
(Caveat: I think serious terminology problems arise when it comes to describing younger Americans' tastes in news. Just as many pollsters and journalists don't consider gaming a significant part of culture, entertainment and technology often aren't considered news. My own belief is that younger Americans, especially those on the Net, are actually information junkies, but the kinds of news they like and the form in which they receive it is very different from their parents' tastes and from the way news is defined by journalists and educators. The kids I encounter online devour enormous amounts of information on a daily basis. That makes sweeping descriptions of their information habits suspect.)
Commercial broadcast news has less function all the time; its looming demise should have been obvious for years. Cable, much more interactive, offers many more options, often in the informal, even satirical (you could watch the convention coverage of Comedy Central's "the "Daily Show" every night and learn much more about the political conventions than on any network), and flexible format that interactive news consumers expect and, increasingly, have grown up with. With news their primary offering, cable-news channels don't have to toss out expensive entertainment programming or advertising to present news. Cable news also pays less homage to outdated anchor formats that have suffocated traditional news presentation for years.
Open source, though a movement in software rather than media per se, has sparked much of the evolution of successful open media, because it introduced the idea of information sharing online. The Net, however, is spawning many new kinds of news media: Web logs, specialized sites like this one, information-sharing exchanges from Napster to Gnutella, messaging services relaying one-to-one news; wire service- like news providers like C-Net. Some are not considered "news" in the traditional sense. But they are very journalistic. They do offer news and information, not only daily but continuously, and about everything from finance to culture to quilting to pet care.
Since the dinosaur-like TV anchors ruled the media world a decade or so ago, the mediascape has become unrecognizable, a rapidly changing work-in-progress. The past decade demonstrates that nobody can predict the media future, only try to hang on and watch while it continues to evolve, and while younger news consumers construct a radically new kind of information system for the first time in centuries.
I have fun checking network news stories. It's amazing how many lies are told!
And the bias on the morning talk show against conservatives is just wonderful to watch.
Try this. Watch Katie of Today show fame. If she is interviewing a liberal, her face just glows with happiness. She gets a mean look when she talks to conservatives.
After Pres. Clinton ordered the bombing of the pill factory in Sudan, the news came out that Pres. Clinton DID NOT consult the Joint Chiefs of Staff! Well little Katie asked if there wasn't some security conserns! The Joint Chiefs of Staff can't be trusted???
So come you people on the wrong side of the digital divide, watch these people work. It's funny!
Ever watch kids fight over a toy? Watching the Sunday morning talking heads is the same thing! Whiny gut kids in suits!
It's fun!!!!
When I was a teenager the big political agenda was redeeming child illiteracy which seemed to be running rampant because of education cutbacks. Now, with 99% of the information on the internet being text based, it's like illiteracy was never an issue. We've revived reading and writing by presenting text in an interactive format.
Jon, you have written a particularly good one here, and your assumptions are on the mark... so I won't flame you this time (Okay, I try to stay out of the Jon Katz Flame War thing on /. anyway)
Every now and then I get a call from my local newspaper asking me if I would like to subscribe, and I always give them the same answer: I get my news of the Internet, so leave me alone.
It is true. I don't follow the traditional media (and to think, in my past life I was a journalist for the U.S. Navy!) By the time a newspaper has been printed, delivered and picked up by the reader, that news is already old. And television broadcast news does not allow me to skip over information that is irrelevant to me or investigate relevant information further.
In fact, the only "traditional media" that I consider still viable is good old radio. And that is only because it's irrelevance is negated by the fact that it is just so damn convienient. (If I had a computer that would pull news off the internet in accordance to my tastes and then use a text to speech engine to read it to me while I drive, I wouldn't have a need for radio either.
We live in an age where not only can we get information from around the globe in a very timely fashion, but we can have that information tailored to meet our individual preferences. TV, Newspapers and ultimately Radio just cannot keep up with interactive media.
Brought to you by Frobozz Magic Penguin Fodder.
Ha, things haven't changed that much, now people stop work and play every Wednesday evening to watch "Survivor"! Yeah, it's kind of a sad turn of events; people haven't turned away from TV, just gotten more pathetic about it.
Here, the power of Netizens to tailor their own media is enormous and profound.
Am I the only one who cringes at the term "netizen"?
Where to begin...
Ok, the idea of "tailoring" media doesn't really seem to be much different than what we've been able to do in the past. If I want to read stock quotes, I'll go to the business section of the New York Times. If I want to access them online, I'll go to yahoo.com. How is the online experience "tailored" while the print one is not? In both cases I can go right to what I want; I don't have to read/access any other section if I don't want to.
Now what about this idea of online news sources being somehow superior to print/broadcast ones? What Jon seems to ignore in a lot of his posts is the issue of authority. Just about anyone can throw together a "news" web page. Why should I believe what I read on it? When I read a paper in the story I can assume it passed through several people's hands to get there. I can be assured that more likely than not, it is reasonably accurate. And while some papers definitely have a bias, whether from the left (Village Voice) or right (New York Daily News), the vast majority of them tend to be somewhat even-handed. Can't be sure about that online, as due to the ease with which web sites can be put up, and security lapses (how often has the print version of the New York Times been hacked?)
News is not open source. It shouldn't be. If I don't like something I read in the paper, I can't alter it to suit my liking.
I think serious terminology problems arise when it comes to describing younger Americans' tastes in news. Just as many pollsters and journalists don't consider gaming a significant part of culture, entertainment and technology often aren't considered news.
Please, find me a single major news source that doesn't cover culture, entertainment, and technology.
The kids I encounter online devour enormous amounts of information on a daily basis. That makes sweeping descriptions of their information habits suspect.
But sweeping descriptions of the information habits of the over 50 crowd is ok?
I have maybe a handful of friends with whom I can discuss current events. A lot of people I know, while highly intelligent, just don't care.
Personally, I get most of my news online, because that's easier for me. I read the paper on the subway, because I think it handles the news better. For certain things (election coverage) I like CNN. Online news may be gaining in popularity, but I don't think it's inherently better than anything else that's out there. And the rise of 24-hour cable news channels is probably has had a lot more impact in recent years than online ones.
And if you've read to the end of this article, I salute you. Didn't mean to go on so much, but these whole internet/youth good, old media/age bad thing really irritates me.
--
I am gross and perverted,
:))
I'm obsessed and deranged,
I have existed for years,
but very little has changed.
I'm the tool of the government
and industry too,
for I was destined to rule
and regulate you.
I may be vile and pernicious
but you can't look away.
I make you think I'm delicious
with the stuff that I say.
I'm the best you can get,
Have you guessed me, yet?
I'm the slime
oozing out
from your TV set.
You will obey me as I lead you
with the garbage that I feed you
untill the day that we don't need you,
don't call for help, no one will heed you.
Your mind is totally controlled
it has been stuffed into my mould
and you will do as you are told
untill the rights to you are sold.
-------------------------------------------
This was from way back in pre-internet days
Loved it so much I memorized it!
try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
When I ask people why they don't watch the news, they usually reply that it doesn't apply to them. When Princess Diana died, many people observed, "Why does everyone care about this woman? She's just a public figurehead! This doesn't apply to ME!" The local (WCBS, New York CBS affiliate) news last night at 6:00 was overwhelmingly "Survivor"-related, with occasional breaks for weather, sports, and some wire news copy of the plane crash in Bahrain that killed 143 people. ("Bahrain? Where the hell is that? I don't care about that! I don't know any of those people! Now give us some more dirt on 'Survivor'!") I literally laughed out loud when I saw a promo hyping "live team coverage" of the "Survivor" winner on the 11:00 news. The affiliate even produced a 7:30 PM pre-show. That's four consecutive hours of "Survivor."
The growing popularity of just-for-me cable channels and customizable news sites means that people only care about what's directly relevant to them. It's a stark departure from the earlier days of TV, where everyone watching television could be alerted of news when it happened. If the president were assassinated right now, you could flip to Cartoon Network to watch something more upbeat. If you wanted to catch the news, you would do it on your own time.
For more information, click here.
I get 99.9% of my news from a combination of my Yahoo, NPR, and Slashdot (tech news;). Why not local news? The local channels (I live outside Boston, MA) rarely actually *covers* news. It's all turned into a vague form of investigative reporting. FOX is the worst at this. Their headlines for almost an entire week was "killer automatic doors" and "if your car falls into the river, what do you do?". Yea, that's the hard-hitting journalism that I want to see. I'll bet you a large wad of cash that there was absolutely no coverage of the MPAA or RIAA.
NPR with "All Things Considered" and "Morning Edition" at least does things right: 5 minute updates of national (then regional) headlines, followed by more in depth coverage of some of the headlines. Follow that with stuff that isn't necessarily news, but interesting anyways (NPR 100 - the 100 most influential music albums, or lost-and-found-sound which once covered the shortwave numbers).
-- Ever notice that fast-burning fuse looks exactly the same as slow-burning fuse? I didn't... (Edgar Montrose)
As a college graduate well under 30, used to regular net access and a caffiene junky, I feel quite prepared to address this issue.
I love reading the paper (The Chicago Tribune is THE paper in my worldview) But not for news. I read the paper when I find a paper, or when I'm at my parents house, or for the comics. I go here and get NYT email every morning, occasionally I look at CNN.
Many times I love knowing what's going on. My friends and I are all addicted to the HISTORY channel. When we bombed bin Laden, we stayed up all night watching fox's coverage (fox played CNN's coverage, then Fox anchorpeople during CNN's commercials) I'll never understand why they did that, except Fox must have WAY too much money.
Plus the "US at WAR" headline was the biggest I've ever seen, 1/2 page just for that. And I got to hear a CNN anchorperson say "Wolf Blitzer will be coming to you ad naseum" REALLY! So I like news.
But life is busy, I've got things to do. When something important happens, I like to hear right away - print is too slow. But when something important happens it gets better coverage on CNN than any network (exception above) so I watch CNN. The difference is most days "regular" news show play regular stories. I find regular stories coma-inducingly boring. I don't care who slept with who, who's the most popular with 12-17 year old girls or how stars lives really are. There just isn't enough news I care about to fill a show every night unless you include depth in stories. And the people still watching it can't deal with depth of stories, only with soundbites. So I'm doubly sold out - half the news I don't want to see. The other half I don't get enough of!
At least with CNN I don't have that second problem. But with the net I have neither problem - I can look at a few headlines and go to the stories I want to read - which is pretty much how a newspaper works. I'll probably get a subscription when I grow out of being a cheap b@st@rd.
So where was I? "Kids" reading news on the net know where it's at. TV doesn't, and hasn't for a long time. There ARE broadcast news shows worth watching - they invariably center around someone with an actual opinion and backbone, and they're usually on PBS (WTTW Ch11, here) All the broadcast news I see is just a couple scanlines higher than "Access Hollywood" in my opinion.
Oh, and I'll read replies, too.
Looking for freelance Actionscript (Flash/Flex) or ColdFusion work and/or freelance developers. Email me, put Slashdot
New Open Media i-news lets you ignore all that 'boring stuff' about irrelevant people!
This great technology allows you to simply never even know about millions of other people and events!
Fed up with old people talking on the news about shit like economics? Don't give a damn because you earn 35,000 quid a year sitting on your arse doing Flash movies? Just cut it out with i-news!
"I used to get fed up with old people talking about, like, foreign affairs and stuff", says newly liberated media consumer Natalie. "It's like I don't care about some old Korean people getting worked up about some border somewhere. I wan't even born when the Korean war happened - it was like so dumb, I can't relate to it. But I never see anything about how Napster is the new American Revolution and how the MPAA are doing so much evil in this world."
And that's not all. By ensuring you _ONLY_ use i-news you can live in an entirely me-centric info-verse. Only stuff that directly affects your wealthy techno-cool urban-hip lifestyle will ever reach you! And That means:
MORE colour pieces on cool kids like you!
MORE pseudo philosophical guff about how YOUNG COOL PEOPLE are really way more important than, like, everyone else.
TOTAL coverage of pointless stupid events like the pre-release demo of naff Doom clone computer games.
ENDLESS ranting by self appointed pundits on how the Internet is JUST SO WONDERFUL.
But, remember, i-news also means:
NO people who use long difficult words.
NO lusers in suits who 'totally don't have a clue'
NO pictures of poor people in far away places.
So, get rid of your t.v. don't buy the papers, and tune in to our short-lived open media web site, where you will be guaranteed to:
DISAPPEAR UP YOU OWN BACKSIDE
as you consume endless, meaningless crap while desperately pretending that because you post shit to some bulletin board you are actually part of a community in any meaningful sense.
Hurt
Maim
Destroy
-----
The nightly news is too heavily influenced by advertisers, politics, and personal bias. The networks are more interests in holding the attention of the vast majority, than report relevant information to its community.