Although it is clear to anyone that various publications
target different demographics, I did not believe such a pattern could be detrimental
instead of beneficial. In particular,
demographics have not only shifted but new ones have emerged. For instance, as Bill Kovach and Tom
Rosenstiel discuss in The Elements of
Journalism, newspapers did evolve to an acceptable degree to accommodate the
interests of mainly European immigrants.
Currently, there are more diverse audiences from other parts of the world,
and the circulation and content of mainstream newspapers has not taken them
into account. Consequently, a core
function of journalism, namely to inform the public, has not been fulfilled as
many communities have been neglected.
This harrowing fact is not only unfair but potentially dangerous as
people will not have the knowledge to make informed decisions and opinions
about the world.
What is even more disturbing is the methods employed to
attract the most viewers. Because these
audiences are so diverse, there is the increasing temptation to revert back to
a yellow journalism mentality and produce pieces designed to create hype
amongst an audience. Unfortunately, all
too many publications and networks succumb to this easier approach. Periods of time in which broadcasters expend
too much thought and energy is are sweeps periods in which networks determine are
sweeps throughout the year in which networks determine what television shows
are the most popular. To inflate their
numbers, apparently networks choose to air pieces people could arguably deem
absurd, such as the dangers of burning candles.
An unsettling recent example of the product of sweeps month is an
article in which the Washington Post
congratulates Jimmy Kimmel on accruing the best sweeps numbers to date. The article mentions what an impressive feat
this was, especially during Hurricane Sandy: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/tv-column/post/jimmy-kimmel-live-scores-best-sweep-stats-ever/2012/11/30/ab6c85d8-3b2e-11e2-b01f-5f55b193f58f_blog.html. This tone is troubling because it encourages
Jimmy Kimmel when his focus on the sweeps period usurped matters of national
importance, in this case the ravages of Hurricane Sandy. Similarly, even though the New York Times admits sweeps periods are
archaic, they nevertheless encourage the competition between Good Morning
America and the Today Show: http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/30/good-morning-america-notches-first-sweeps-win-over-today/.
However, one does not have to be in the midst of a sweeps
period to find hyped pieces. A prime
example of a recently hyped story is the resignation of David Petraeus from
being Director of the Central Intelligence Agency due to infidelity in his
marriage. While this news is certainly
disturbing and newsworthy, the sheer volume of media coverage far outweighed
its ultimate significance amongst the American people. Greg Jaffe of the Washington Post attempts to rectify this coverage and offers a
thoughtful, balanced assessment of General Petraeus: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/petraeus-not-a-hero-but-not-a-failure/2012/11/30/8b9e46d8-3a57-11e2-b01f-5f55b193f58f_story.html.
It is likely an exercise in futility to reach all
demographics, but this does not mean that journalists cease striving to achieve
this goal or resort to base means such as hyped stories. Journalists carry the burden but arguably
sacred responsibility of listening to the many different voices in the
communities their publication addresses and providing appropriate, useful
information about the world and pertinent issues.
