Friday, February 8, 2013

Hollywoodization of the News


The news is something that has been a part of American’s lives forever, from smoke signals to the nightly news on television to the New York Times app on your smart phone. It has warned us and informed us. So when did it become more about who is in the news instead of what?
            One of most important men covered in the news is the President of the United States, Barack Obama. While we are familiar with his policies etc., what else do we associate President Obama with in the news? Celebrities. The 98th White House Correspondent Assn dinner, once known as the “nerd prom”, was now filled with “red carpets and photo lines”- a true “Hollywoodization of the weekend” (Johnson, 2012). The guest list included many celebrities and supermodels versus cabinet members and political powers (Johnson, 2012).  “The ritual of media companies inviting celebrities to their tables seem[ed] to have taken on more importance” such as Fox News Guests Lindsay Lohan and Kim Kardashian (Johnson, 2012). Another star studded event occurred in September of 2012 where President Obama was the guest of honor at a fundraising event held for him by none other than Jay-Z and Beyonce (Standard, 2012). The event was held at Jay-Z’s famous 40/40 Club and the tickets were $40,000.00 (Standard, 2012). This idea of Hollywoodization sparked Republican Party Chairman Ed Cox who felt that “America need[ed] a President more interested in the status of our allies abroad and our own unemployed at home than in partying with celebrities” (Standard, 2012). Obama was also seen at other “star-studded fundraisers” such as a $250 Foo Fighters concert and a $35,800 dinner with Will Ferrell (Martinez, 2012).  President Obama is only one example of infotainment and Hollywoodization used in today’s media news outlets.
            We depend on our news outlets as reliable sources to keep us informed about what’s going on locally and globally. War, conflict, arrests and the weather are some of the major things Americans want to be updated on daily or even hourly. However, those sources aren’t always as credible as we hope. One example of this Hollywoodization effect is Jenny McCarthy. According to the Columbia Journalism Review, the Chicago Sun-Times hired the “actress-model, author and activist” as a columnist to blog five days a week and write a weekly print advice column (Vanasco, 2012).  McCarthy’s main goal is to spread awareness about her belief that vaccines cause autism (Vanasco, 2012). The problem? Science says there is “absolutely no link to vaccines and autism” (Vanasco, 2012). Veronica Arreola, “an opinion writer on feminism and women’s issues and the director of the Women in Science and Engineering Program at the University of Illinois at Chicago”, explains how “someone of her statue to have a platform like this is really dangerous” (Vanasco, 2012).  

20 comments:

  1. The American Journalism Review argues that “better over all coverage” enhances the news (Moeller, 1998). The author argues that readers are suffering from “compassion fatigue” with all of the “suffering infotainment” in the news such as Ebola in Zaire, famine in Sudan and war in Iraq (Moeller, 1998). Readers and viewers begin to feel that all causes and solutions of the suffering are oversimplified and “all sound alike” because there is always a victim, rescuer and villain (Moeller, 1998). Does injecting the news with celebrities and Hollywoodization create “better over all coverage” or does it distract from real issues at hand (Moeller, 1998)? Is our “experience and understanding of a crisis weakened, diluted or distorted” by these “suffering infotainment” stories (Moeller, 1998)?
    Why is this so important? Americans are constantly accessing and absorbing news in more media outlets than ever before. In fact “46% of Americans get their news from 4-6 media platforms” (Purcell, Mitchell, Rosenstiel, Olmstead, 2010). Even though “28% of internet users customize a home page with news from sources and topics of interest”, our major news outlets should reflect our society and culture as a whole (Purcell, Mitchell, Rosenstiel, Olmstead, 2010). Also, “37% of internet users use social media to comment, create or disseminate” news (Purcell, Mitchell, Rosenstiel, Olmstead, 2010). Should Hollywoodization and infotainment continue to be a part of American culture and in the news? Does it provide better “over all coverage” (Moeller, 1998)? Does social media have an impact on the news?

    Work Cited
    BINGHAM, AMY, and JILIAN FAMA. "Celeb Couple Host Obama Fundraiser in NYC." ABC News. ABC News Network, 18 Sept. 2012. Web. 06 Feb. 2013.
    "Standard Digital World." Standard Digital News. N.p., 19 Sept. 2012. Web. 06 Feb. 2013.
    "POLITICO." POLITICO. N.p., 16 Feb. 2012. Web. 06 Feb. 2013.
    Vanasco, Jennifer. "Minority Reports." Columbia Journalism Review. N.p., 29 Oct. 2012. Web. 06 Feb. 2013.
    Moeller, Susan D. "When Suffering Becomes Infotainment   ." When Suffering Becomes Infotainment | American Journalism Review. N.p., Nov. 1998. Web. 06 Feb. 2013.
    Johnson, Ted. "H'w'd and D.C." Variety. N.p., 29 Apr. 2012. Web. 06 Feb. 2013.
    Purcell, Kristen, Lee Rainie, Amy Mitchell, Tom Rosenstiel, and Kenny Olmstead. "Understanding the Participatory News Consumer." Understanding the Participatory News Consumer (2010): n. pag. Web. 06 Feb. 2013. .

    ReplyDelete
  2. With the introduction and cell phones and the internet into our daily lives, getting the news has become so much easier. In fact, “33% of cell phone owners now access news on their cell phones” and “37% of internet users have contributed to the creation of news, commented about it, or disseminated it via postings on social media sites” (Purcell et al. 2). However, it seems that instead of preserving the sanctity of traditional news, these new technologies are actually harming it.

    In the past decade, the attention span of news viewers has shrunk considerably. Especially as Generation Y takes the stage, people want the quickest form of news possible—typically in the form of 140 characters. Because the news is a “social experience,” news sources choose the best stories that will allow the most buzz (Purcell et al. 2). Social media seems to be one of the main sources of news for younger generations, allowing them to get news instantaneously and disseminate information quicker than ever. While it is clear that social media is being used by and for traditional news outlets, there is also a strong pull toward celebrities and Hollywood gossip. As has been mentioned in class, musicians and celebrities dominate Twitter with the most followers—including Justin Bieber and Lady Gaga. There is an obvious obsession with celebrities and their daily lives.

    This obsession with entertainment news has not just stopped on social media sites. Celebrities are mentioned on the 5 o’clock news, are guest stars in morning talk shows, and also appear on page 6 in the local paper. While celebrities are undeniably influential in our culture, it seems as if they are overshadowing stories of critical or national importance. It seems as though the pregnancy of a famous couple gets more attention than a war in a distant country. Perhaps this trend may be due to the fact that the viewers are apathetic. Or maybe the news outlets are just reporting what they think the public wants to hear. Whatever the reasons behind this trend of celebrities leading the news headlines, it seems to only be getting worse.

    Also, besides watering down more important news stories, social media is also harming traditional news organizations financially. These institutions are in a constant “struggle to find a sustainable model after more than a decade of declining advertising revenues and digital upheaval” (Olmstead et al.). However, when they do find a model that works, the face of media changes again and they must find, yet again, another model. In the past two months, a prominent news magazine—Newsweek—was forced to stop their print magazine and continue solely online. This is probably the beginning to a new trend of news organizations in an attempt to find a successful business model.

    Overall, it seems that, for now, the Hollywoodization of the news is not going anywhere. Because the news organizations make their profits from the number of viewers they are able to draw in, they are forced to provide stories that their viewers will be interested in hearing about. Unfortunately, the current audience craves the latest news on their favorite celebrities over the recent progresses Congress has made with the economy.

    Works Cited

    Purcell, Kristen, Lee Rainie, Amy Mitchell, Tom Rosenstiel, and Kenny Olmstead. "Understanding the Participatory News Consumer." Pew Research Center, 1 Mar. 2010. Web. 9 Feb. 2013.

    Olmstead, Kenny, Jane Sasseen, Amy Mitchell, and Tom Rosenstiel. "Digital: News Gains Audience but Loses Ground in Chase for Revenue." N.p., n.d. Web. 9 Feb. 2013.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The news is an important aspect of American’s everyday lives. Without it, we would not be able to stay informed about what is going on in the world today. The news has developed over the decades from newspapers to television in order to keep up with all of the new technologies. Although newspapers and the television news stations are still around today, we have many different technologies that have allowed us to keep updated on what is happening in our own country as well as around the world. These new ways of gathering news include social media such as Facebook and Twitter, as well as cell phone apps. We are now able to instantaneously find out things in the palm of our hand, since most people are usually attached to their cell phones. About “33% of cell phone owners now access news on their cell phones” (Purcell). Though we are not getting news the traditional way, we are still consuming a significant amount of news, maybe even more news than we have in the past from just newspapers. We are also able to be updated constantly, rather than waiting for the newspaper to be published and learn about something that has happened the day before. Now, we are able to know what is going on almost at the minute it is happening. “Some 46% of Americans say they get news from four to six media platforms on a typical day” (Purcell). This goes to show that not only are people consuming news, they are also receiving it from many different types of media platforms. As Stephanie mentioned in her blog, we depend on our news outlets and expect them to be credible. The fact that people are now getting news from many different platforms may help to make sure they are getting the most up to date news and that it is credible since they are checking it against other news agencies.

    Although I feel that social media and cell phone use is an ideal and effective way for people to get the news, Erica brings up a valid point in her discussion, saying that the traditional news organizations are being harmed financially because of it. “The new tablets, smartphones and other mobile technologies represent new ways to reach audiences, but they are also a new wave of new technology that news companies need to react to” (Olmstead). These traditional news organizations must find a way to react to the changes of different platforms that people are using to access news. Creating cell phone apps and Twitter pages is definitely one way that they can stay on top of the trends of society.

    “To a great extent people’s experience of news, especially on the internet, is becoming a shared social experience as people swap links in emails, post news stories on their social networking site feeds, highlight news stories in their Tweets…” (Purcell). I know I have read many stories on social media sites that I probably would not have read if it weren't for someone else posting them. Many of the stories or information that I read on social media sites usually has to do with celebrities. For example, I found out through Twitter that Kim Kardashian was pregnant. The minute information about a celebrity is found out I can always count on someone that I follow on Twitter to tweet about it or post something on Facebook. Our society to some extent has made the news to be about celebrities’ pregnancies rather than staying informed about serious things that are happening around the world, such as wars and genocides. It is sad that we often forget about other important events that are happening around the world because we get so wrapped up in what celebrities are doing.

    Works Cited

    Purcell, Kristen, Lee Rainie, Amy Mitchell, Tom Rosenstiel, and Kenny Olmstead. "Understanding the Participatory News Consumer." Pew Research Center, 1 Mar. 2010. Web. 9 Feb. 2013.

    Olmstead, Kenny, Jane Sasseen, Amy Mitchell, and Tom Rosenstiel. "Digital: News Gains Audience but Loses Ground in Chase for Revenue." N.p., n.d. Web. 9 Feb. 2013.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The news is a vital part of every Americans everyday life. As technology has advanced and times have changed Americans feel as though they always need to be connected and informed. With the explosion of social media over the past decade, the news has taken a turn from being something you sit down to watch every evening into something that you are unable to get away from. Whether you are checking your facebook, your twitter feed, or turning on your television or radio you are receiving some sort of information. “The days of loyalty to a particular news organization on a particular piece of technology in a particular form are gone.”(Purcell)

    Though there are pros and cons to each side I do believe that news in forms of social media are fast and effective. We live in a generation where ones cell phone usually does not leave their hands so posting something on social media can reach thousands of people in a matter of seconds. “33% of cell phone owners now access news on their cell phones.”(Purcell) Though social media is a good form of news I do believe it is way too consumed with celebrity buzz. Hollywoodization of the news is an upcoming issue. I believe the news had to add information about celebrities and Hollywood because it is what we as a nation demanded. You will get more viewers to sit down and watch the presidential inauguration if you throw a little Beyonce in there because it is what this society has become.

    Erica brings up a great point stating that this Hollywoodization of the news is “watering down more important news stories.” Celebrity buzz is taking over important facts and stories that we as Americans are browsing over in order to get to the “bigger” stories such as who is getting traded to the Yankees or who won Xfactor. Right now this may not seem to be that big of an issue but the more we are consumed and obsessed by celebrity news and stories the larger this problem will become. When logging onto the Internet ones homepage would most likely be generated with stories about Kim K and Kanye’s baby rather then global issues our nation may be facing. Though watching the news on the tv may still not have changed that much, the internet is filled with celebrity gossip. This may not seem like a big deal until you realize that “the internet has surpassed newspapers and radio in popularity as a news platform on a typical day and now ranks just behind tv”(Purcell) With the rise of people receiving their news online who is to say that someday (maybe sooner then later) it will surpass tv too.


    Purcell, Kristen, Lee Rainie, Amy Mitchell, Tom Rosenstiel, and Kenny Olmstead. "Understanding the Participatory News Consumer." Pew Research Center, 1 Mar. 2010. Web. 9 Feb. 2013.

    ReplyDelete
  5. “Consumers appear to be using different devices for news at different times of the day,” (Olmstead) regardless of where we get news we are being informed from every device we pick up from hour to hour. But what kind of news are we getting and where are we going to get it? Well most of the time its infotainment news that involves celebrities, the latest weather, or the latest breaking news case. Celebrity news has become a norm in our everyday lives. It’s so popular that E! News is a channel for only celebrity news, and it plays every night like a normal local newscast.

    If we do want information from CNN or any other news organization, we download the app to our smart phone or follow that organization on Twitter. That’s why Kenny Olmstead’s article didn’t surprise me when the facts were that “news sites now get 9% of their traffic from social media” (Olmstead). More then ever I think social media is helping news websites and TV stations stay alive. Most every newspaper and news station have a Twitter page and keep it updated so that they can drag people to their websites from their tweets. If we want to find out what the latest gossip is or what the weather is going to be we can find that all on our smart phone by simply pressing the “follow” button.

    News outlets have also realized that most of the users on social media are younger people. The most people that were surveyed by the Newspaper Association of America say that they follow their local newspaper on whatever format is most convenient for them.

    Still the most relevant topics that are searched for on the web consist of weather, and national events (Purcell). News will always be needed, it just depends on what form we get our news in. We go from computers, to smart phones, to tablets. And today as most of us would already find believable, “Some 51% of smartphone owners use that device to get news, as do 56% of tablet owners.” (Olmstead)

    Our type of news in my generation is celebrity news, and in my parent’s generation, it was crime news. Each generation’s opinion of what is news is going to change, and so is how they receive their news. Overall what is good about having social media be intertwined with news is that now we get our news wherever we are. If a story is breaking then we are able to look up a news organization and find the latest news on Google. Everything is so technologically advanced today that I can only imagine where we are going to get our news in the next 10 years. Maybe newspapers will die out eventually, but there is always going to be a need for them on the internet as far as I see it.



    Purcell, Kristen, Lee Rainie, Amy Mitchell, Tom Rosenstiel, and Kenny Olmstead. "Understanding the Participatory News Consumer." Understanding the Participatory News Consumer (2010): n. pag. Web. 06 Feb. 2013. .


    Olmstead, Kenny, Jane Sasseen, Amy Mitchell, and Tom Rosenstiel. "Digital: News Gains Audience but Loses Ground in Chase for Revenue." N.p., n.d. Web. 9 Feb. 2013.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The news has no longer become the news on CNN or the facts written in a newspaper. The news has now turned into the information celebrities put out there on twitter. News is technically no longer newsworthy. What is newsworthy? That is a debatable question. Some people like to argue the ranking of different topics such as what Kim Kardashian ate for lunch, or if Lindsay Lohan got a DUI. This is the news that everyone from our generation wants to hear. Our society is so obsessed with hearing the latest news, but we do not want the news from a newspaper. We are starving to hear the latest celebrity gossip from twitter or Facebook. We are so obsessed with celebrities that they have become the most newsworthy information at the moment.

    Stephanie poses the question does social media have an impact on the news? Social media has positive and negative effects on the news. The news is getting out quickly and is accessed all over the world. The negative effect of using social media to disseminate the news is that you must be the first person to get the information out there. “Just 7% get their news from a single media platform on a typical day” (Purcell). Many people do not use a single media platform because they know that some sources are not true. Today it is completely necessary to double check or sometimes even triple check your sources whether or not they have the most accurate information. The main purpose of journalists is to be the first one with the news out there. Is any form of publicity good publicity? Some would say that attention is attention whether it is good or bad publicity. The line with getting attention from social media is blurred because people are getting attention for all the wrong reasons.

    Cell phones have made it more efficient to get the news. You can access the news from anywhere at anytime. You can Google any topic and find numerous articles on the same subject. Less people are more likely to Google about the weather than tweet about Kim Kardashian’s pregnancy. It is unimaginable to know that you can get the news on any form of technology. “Four in ten Americans reported getting ‘most of their national and international news’ from the Internet, according to a December 2011 survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press” (Olmstead). I truly believe that newspapers are going to become extinct because you can get the news on you iPhone, tablet, iPad, kindle, iPod or laptop. News is becoming an open topic because people can easily comment or tweet back at celebrities. The fact that news is interactive makes people even more intrigued. The latest trend such as live tweeting has made followers feel involved in the show without physically being there to comment on the situation.

    Our generation needs to put themselves out there more and become more interested in real newsworthy situations. The Internet can be seen as a threat because it is making our generation denser. We have become so lazy that we would rather Google information than actually go to the store to buy the newspaper. I also found it very interesting that Olmstead states that the type of technology we use to access the news depends on the time of the day. This also contributes to the fact that we as the ‘Technological Generation’ are so lazy that we need to read the news on a bigger form of technology. Our generation needs to stop being so lazy and start following a real newsworthy person on twitter such as Obama.

    Works Cited
    Purcell, Kristen, Lee Rainie, Amy Mitchell, Tom Rosenstiel, and Kenny Olmstead. "Understanding the Participatory News Consumer." Pew Research Center, 1 Mar. 2010. Web. 9 Feb. 2013.

    Olmstead, Kenny, Jane Sasseen, Amy Mitchell, and Tom Rosenstiel. "Digital: News Gains Audience but Loses Ground in Chase for Revenue." N.p., n.d. Web. 9 Feb. 2013.

    ReplyDelete
  7. The news is a constant component of what makes the world go round. If it weren’t for the term “breaking news” there would be no hype in daily newscasts. This means that news networks would not be able to cut into daily programs if these serious events did not occur. Events such as shootings, fires, terroristic threats and weather alerts have been just a few of the many breaking stories that have come across our television sets within the past year. This is not saying that news stations are relying on something bad happening in order for them to get more air time, but simply that these reporters are on a 24/7 call to keep us updated with the latest. Although all stations are reporting on the same stories (and are usually lined up in a horizontal line where the breaking news is occurring) they each are trying to connect with their viewers through social media websites like twitter and Facebook.

    As Generation Y members, we see that social media is a vital way in which we receive our updates in the news world. Since our lives are always on-the-go between school, work, and social events, we have discussed in class that Generation Y has a hard time with time management skills. Which can lead to the fact that we do not have time to sit down and watch an hour-long newscast. We want the information quick and as efficient as possible and this is why we turn to our social media sites through our technological devices to bring insight into what is going on in the world around us. It has been surveyed that ‘51% of smartphone owners use that device to get news’ (Olmstead) and “33% of cell phone owners now access news on their cell phones.”(Purcell) This does not seem to be shocking in that this world is turning into a technological epidemic because even the reporters are using their devices to research and track information through their cell phones.

    News reporters are aware that their live newscasts are not being televised or watched directly from the consumer’s home anymore. This is why so many of the reporters are competing with one another to distribute in the best way to effectively reach out to those who are not turning on their television sets. For example, by giving a teaser on twitter of what to expect in their live-shot, they are trying to draw people into listening to the live report. “An investigation in New York continues, tune in at 5 to hear the details.” If someone sees this posted to twitter, they may be more likely to turn on their TV’s.

    I think Stephanie brings up a great issue when she states that many people feel “that all causes and solutions of the suffering are oversimplified and all sound alike” (Moeller, 1998). This is because of the competition for each news station to deliver the same events but in a different style. When they incorporate someone famous into their news story, possibly for someone who feels strongly about an issue and is trying to speak out through social media, they may use that to make a certain issue become more aware. This is how the ‘Hollywoodization’ of the News can also come into play because people often tend to follow and hop on the bandwagon with someone who is speaking out in the public eye.

    Moeller, Susan D. "When Suffering Becomes Infotainment   ." When Suffering Becomes Infotainment | American Journalism Review. N.p., Nov. 1998. Web. 10 Feb. 2013.
    Olmstead, Kenny, Jane Sasseen, Amy Mitchell, and Tom Rosenstiel. "Digital: News Gains Audience but Loses Ground in Chase for Revenue." N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Feb. 2013.
    Purcell, Kristen, Lee Rainie, Amy Mitchell, Tom Rosenstiel, and Kenny Olmstead. "Understanding the Participatory News Consumer." Pew Research Center, 1 Mar. 2010. Web. 9 Feb. 2013.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Americans use the radio, newspaper, television, and Internet to stay current with the news. It is important to stay connected and be informed of what is occurring, whether it is world news or the latest technology. The Internet is a rapidly growing popular outlet to receive news. It allows for news to be consumed easily and fast. The Internet allows the news to reach a wide-ranging audience. “News sites now get 9% of their traffic from social media, up about 57% in two years. That is almost half of what comes from search engines. But as more news organizations put in place an actively managed social media strategy, those numbers will likely grow. Already, some that have moved aggressively with social media, such as The Huffington Post, generate as much traffic from social media as they do from search” (Olmstead). I intern at a news site called Global Grind in New York City and we heavily rely on social media for our traffic. The stories are posted on Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr, and Pinterest. Sometimes the same story is posted multiple times a day. Even though news organizations put themselves at risk by depending on social media heavily, it is because that is where the audience is. The consumers rely on social media for news greatly. “We depend on our news outlets as reliable sources to keep us informed about what’s going on locally and globally” (Matuszkiewicz). Consumers personalize their homepage to a news outlet and customize to specific topics that interest them. People are attached to their cell phones and are always checking social media tool, which grants them access to news at the palm of their hand. People comment and repost news on social media outlets. “To a great extent, people experience news especially on the internet, is becoming a shared social experience as people swap links in e-mails, post news stories on their social networking site feeds, highlight news stories in their Tweets, and haggle over the meaning of events in discussion threads” (Purcell). Users do not just stick to only one online news source, but use multiple platforms to be informed. The major news organizations are the most popular site. People share news with family and friends by e-mail or reposting the story. Sometimes, people first learn of news from people that they follow. “News consumption is socially-engaging and socially-driven activity, especially online. The public is clearly part of the news process now. Participation comes more through sharing than through contributing news themselves” (Purcell). Social media allows for news consumers to express their feelings about news and to follow major news organizations.
    Entertainment news is very popular with the younger generation. Whether it is Kimye having a baby or Chris Brown and Frank Ocean getting into a fight, people want to know what is going on in the lives of the rich and famous. As soon as I walked into my internship last week, the entire office was frantic over Lil Wayne’s hair. There were pictures posted that made it seem as if Lil Wayne cut his dreads. Like who cares? There is more important news, such as the 15-year-old girl from Chicago who sang at Obama’s inauguration and was killed 8 days later. I bet very few people are aware of that tragedy. But that news is not publicized as much Blue Ivy’s foot hanging out of a blanket. Entertainment news is even on the evening news, along with the murderer that is on the loose. Some people rather know what is happening in Hollywood, rather than wars being fought in the Middle East.


    Work Cited
    Purcell, Kristen, Lee Rainie, Amy Mitchell, Tom Rosenstiel, and Kenny Olmstead. "Understanding the Participatory News Consumer." Pew Research Center, 1 Mar. 2010. Web. 11 Feb. 2013.



    Olmstead, Kenny, Jane Sasseen, Amy Mitchell, and Tom Rosenstiel. "Digital: News Gains Audience but Loses Ground in Chase for Revenue." N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Feb. 2013.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Part 1

    Since the rise and increasing popularity of social media, the newspapers and other print media forms has struggled to stay afloat. So, naturally and logically, these dying news organizations and companies turn to social media to revive itself. Smart news organizations know they pretty much have to do whatever it takes to stay afloat. Smarter news companies also know that they are not in control and that they have to appeal and cater to the masses in order to secure its own future. Hence the rationale behind the Hollywoodization of the News
    To backtrack a little the relationship of news and society has changed. Before the invention of social media, the relationship of news to its consumers and viewers was one way. News programs and organizations had much more control over the content and the way they distribute it to the masses. News organizations such as CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, MSNBC, or FOX News Network all catered and appealed to its wide range of audiences and their different sensibilities and values. More conservative viewers watched Fox News, more liberal viewers watched MSNBC, either way these viewers were loyal to a few or even one news station. Even so, this loyalty now gone, according to the article, “Understands the Participatory News Consumer." By Kristen Purcell, Lee Rainie, Director, Amy Mitchell, Tom Rosenstiel and Kenny Olmstead of Pew Internet: “The days of loyalty to a particular news organization on a particular piece of technology in a particular form are gone,” (Purcell, 2). In this quote Purcell is stating that this relationship and loyalty to a particular news organization is no more.

    Part 1

    ReplyDelete
  10. Part 2

    Since then this relationship has changed drastically. It isn’t so much a question of loyalty in the relationship between a news consumer and a news organization but the relationship is more focused on personal, convenient ways for both news organizations and its consumers to attach themselves to one another. In this same article quote, “In this new multi-platform media environment, people’s relationship to news is becoming portable, personalized, and participatory,” (Purcell, 2). In this quote explains that people’s relationships to news are much more convenient and tailored. This means thanks to social media technology there are more convenient ways to view news. An example would be instead of tuning in to the 6pm news every night on your television, you can tune in at 7pm, 2am or 3pm to look up news on your phone, laptop, or iPad. Not only that but social media also allows consumers to involve themselves in the news, either through posting comments, sharing links of articles or liking news organization pages, hence participatory.
    Understanding this relationship and how it has changed we can move forward into the Hollywoodization of the News. Why is it that President Barack Obama has a Facebook Page or a Twitter account? The answer is that’s where a lot of Americans are spending their most of their time along with other popular social media sites. Facebook and Twitter are not only ways to socialize but also for people to be kept informed.

    Part 2

    ReplyDelete
  11. Part 3 of 3

    According to the article, “"Digital: News Gains Audience but Loses Ground in Chase for Revenue," by Kenny Olmstead, Jane Sasseen, Amy Mitchell, and Tom Rosenstiel, “for news providers, there is no choice but to get to know the “frenemy. Social media – particularly Facebook, with its huge audience and domineering lead – have become a partner no news organization can afford to ignore.” In this quote social media is dominate and a powerful factor that news organizations reluctantly have to utilize. In turn, smart news organizations have to take this opportunity to reach out to consumers and potential consumers on their level.
    In regards to the Hollywoodization of the News, the use by news organizations to provide news articles and information on popular celebrity stories, it’s a logical and smart move to garner viewers. It’s an appropriate and can also be viewed to some as a desperate attempt for news organizations because what news organizations need to survive in the age of social media is to garner loyalty. As stated in the same article, “Social media, nevertheless, have become a part of the digital fabric and many news leaders recognize it as an increasingly critical tool in gaining new digital readers and building a loyal, highly engaged audience,” (Olmstead, 4). This quote is stating that social media can be used a tool, an instrument implemented to gaining readership and fostering loyalty. So, even if its through superficial methods such as reporting on celebrity “news” and gossip, news organizations have to appeal, engage and respond to its consumers and viewers. Thus, reacting, molding, and integrating itself into this new dynamic and two way relationship.


    Works Cited
    Purcell, Kristen, Lee Rainie, Amy Mitchell, Tom Rosenstiel, and Kenny Olmstead. "Understanding the Participatory News Consumer." Pew Research Center, 1 Mar. 2010. Web. 9 Feb. 2013.
    Olmstead, Kenny, Jane Sasseen, Amy Mitchell, and Tom Rosenstiel. "Digital: News Gains Audience but Loses Ground in Chase for Revenue." N.p., n.d. Web. 9 Feb. 2013.

    Part 3 of 3

    ReplyDelete
  12. It is very interesting to see how much is consumed within the news. Being a history minor, I was always fascinated with the way in which political figures would deal with situations. Whether it is through a radio report, or meeting with figures from other nations, it intrigued me how secret and private these meetings were. However, it is interesting to see as we have grown up in this technology era how much has evolved since we were kids.
    Receiving the news, especially breaking news, has always been a main priority for Americans. As a society we have developed the dependence on our technology and having something at an instant notice. Stephanie states in her blog that “46% of Americans get their news from 4-6 media platforms” (Purcell, Mitchell, Rosenstiel, Olmstead, 2010). This is an interesting point especially being that it definitely rings true. With the new devices such as laptops, tablets, smart phones, people have found numerous ways to receive their information regardless of where they are in the world.
    Stephanie asks great questions: should Hollywoodization and infotainment continue to be a part of American culture and in the news? Does it provide better “over all coverage” (Moeller, 1998)? Does social media have an impact on the news? I definitely think that even if someone did not want this Hollywoodization apart of American culture, it would still occur. There are so many people in society who depend on this instant newsfeed and this Hollywoodization. I think that while it does provide great “over all coverage” (Moeller, 1998), there have been many instances in which information was leaked and that information was false or inaccurate. One example that comes to mind was the tragic shooting at Sandy Hook. So much information was leaking through twitter or Facebook, that for a majority of the day we believed the shooter had a different name. I understand that the news wants to keep the public informed as much as possible especially when dealing with a tragedy like this one. However, I think that the authenticity of news coverage has declined since the inventions of social media. Social media definitely has an impact on the news. News rooms are able to receive information through people who may be halfway across the nation. Social media also has an impact on how we are able to perceive information based on who the source is and how it was received. However, social media may be going a little overboard. Celebrities tweet about what they do on a daily basis, that tweet may then be displayed on not only an entertainment news channel but also on a news channel such as NBC nightly news.
    I do not think that social media craze will ever die out; if anything it will continue to gain followers. However, I do think that celebrities should not be having such a priority over other stories in the news. Social media has been great with generating information in a timely manner, but the accuracy of certain “posts” needs to change before false information is displayed and problems arise.


    Moeller, Susan D. "When Suffering Becomes Infotainment   ." When Suffering Becomes Infotainment | American Journalism Review. N.p., Nov. 1998. Web. 06 Feb. 2013.
    Olmstead, Kenny, Jane Sasseen, Amy Mitchell, and Tom Rosenstiel. "Digital: News Gains Audience but Loses Ground in Chase for Revenue." N.p., n.d. Web. 9 Feb. 2013.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Part 1/2

    Over the course of the past century, as technology has progressed, the way in which Americans receive news has changed drastically. From newspapers and radio to television and the Internet, the dissemination of news has become immediate and mobilized. According to the Pew Research Center, the Internet is gradually eclipsing older technologies as the go-to source for news, surpassing newspapers by the end of 2010. Currently only television remains more popular (Olmstead et al. 1-2). A Pew Internet study, however, finds that a majority of Americans (59%) continue to get theirs news from a combination of various online and offline sources (Purcell et al. 20).
    Yet perhaps the most important game-changer in news today is mobile technology. A study by the Project for Excellence in Journalism (PEJ) found that 51% of smartphone users and 56% of tablet users receive news information on their devices (Olmstead et al. 2). As others have mentioned here, as the popularity of smartphones and other mobile technologies have increased, users’ attention spans have subsequently decreased. Those who are multitasking or constantly on the go may not may not be able to or simply may not want to read a lengthy news article, instead opting for quicker ways of gathering information such as social media. Social networking sites such as Twitter have become an important part of news reporting, allowing news organizations to send out short and immediate news updates that can reach a wide number of people. The need for a constant stream of instant information is one that is one that increased in the post-9/11 world. Once used primarily for special breaking updates, the news crawl became a permanent fixture of news programs following the attacks as the United States entered into a major war.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Part 2/2

    The use of instant social media updates and the fact that online and offline news sources are continually vying for Americans’ attentions are what I believe to be two important factors in the recent “Hollywoodization” of news, as well as the increased dramatization. In their competition for audiences, especially in the era of social networking, news organizations often turn to sensationalism in order to draw people in. Once a staple ploy of tabloids, more news sources are using dramatic headlines as a lure. This morning’s home page of The Huffington Post (a major user of social media itself) is a perfect example of this. In reference to the overnight story that the Pope is stepping down, the home page of the site consists of a photo of the Pope with a large, bold purple headline in all caps stating simply: “POPE OUT.” Stretching across the entire page, it is unavoidably attention-grabbing. The headline is followed by a caption with a series of similarly dramatic buzzwords and phrases including “Papacy clouded in scandal…Christian world in shock.” Similar to their increasing use of celebrities, sensationalism is a tactic that many news organizations have turned to in hopes of gaining more viewers, especially those of younger generations.

    Olmstead, Kenny, Jane Sasseen, Amy Mitchell, and Tom Rosenstiel. "Digital: News Gains Audience but Loses Ground in Chase for Revenue." N.p., n.d. Web. 9 Feb. 2013.

    Purcell, Kristen, Lee Rainie, Amy Mitchell, Tom Rosenstiel, and Kenny Olmstead. "Understanding the Participatory News Consumer." Pew Research Center, 1 Mar. 2010. Web. 9 Feb. 2013.

    ReplyDelete
  15. If you interviewed 100 people on the street, my guess would be that more could tell you the names of every member of the Kardashian family than the names of everyone in the President’s cabinet. It’s no secret that people today, especially Americans, don’t really value the actual news. A perfect example is the Superbowl. The Superbowl, which not only featured the two best NFL teams of the 2012-2013 season, but also superstar Beyoncé, was watched by over 108 million Americans. Only 38 million people, however, watched President Obama’s 2012 State of the Union. The State of the Union, which is one of the most important speeches the President can make in any given year, was watched by less than half of the audience of a football game. And that’s just one night of television. It seems as though these days, the airwaves are filled with more junk than actual substance; more mindless reality shows than thoughtful productions. The news doesn’t even carry much weight anymore. When you can tune into your local news and hear about the new “Kimye” baby, there’s a problem. Celebrities are being turned into important public figures, and politicians are turning into celebrities.

    Stephanie discussed President Obama being seen as a celebrity, and often being surrounded by superstars. I completely agree- the President is 100% being seen as more of a celebrity, and I think that’s the fault of the news first and foremost. Take the 2008 Presidential election. The election occurred during a time of crisis for Americans. The war in Iraq, the fiscal crisis, gay rights, and the American education system were all among hot button issues that NEEDED to be discuss. But, as Baran and Davis write, “what do you remember from the mass media as the important issues and images of that campaign” (293). We remember Tina Fey’s Sarah Palin skits; we remember that Oprah endorsed a presidential candidate for the first time; we remember stupid things that Joe Biden said, and how old John McCain was. Very few can say that celebrities and Hollywood did not taint their election experience. The question is, did it help?

    Baran and Davis discuss agenda setting – the idea that media don’t tell people what to think, but what to think about (293). That’s exactly what happened in 2008 – the news didn’t tell you who you should support of vote for, but they certainly made a habit of making one candidate look more appealing than the other. Even during the primaries, when Hillary Clinton was toe to toe with Barak Obama, it was clear that Obama was the favorite among the Hollywood crowd. But did it work? Did tying politics to Hollywood enhance the election? For one thing, more young voters turned out in 2008 than ever before, and I don’t think that’s a coincidence.

    Purcell et al. write “some 46% of Americans say they get their news from four to six media platforms on a typical day” (2). Later, it’s shown that 56% of people use portal websites, like GoogleNews or AOL, as their online news source, rather than actual news outlets. Those portal websites show celebrity news, reality show news, and some regular news. In addition, 13% use Facebook, and a combined 10% use Twitter (26). With these stats, it would almost make sense to make the news more Hollywood. More people will click on a link about President Obama with Beyoncé than of President Obama making a speech. And more people will follow CNN if they know that in addition to news coverage, they get the latest on celebrities. Although sad, this is the world we live in now, and it seems like news outlets are resorting to Hollywoodification in order to make the masses just a little more interested in the actual news.

    Baran, Stanley J., and Dennis K. Davis. Mass Communication Theory: Foundations, Ferment, and Future. 6th ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Pub., 1995. 293-311. Print.

    Purcell, Kristen, Lee Rainie, Amy Mitchell, Tom Rosenstiel, and Kenny Olmstead. "Understanding the Participatory News Consumer." Pew Research Center, 1 Mar. 2010. Web. 9 Feb. 2013.

    ReplyDelete
  16. “The News” has become such a broad term in today’s society. No longer is it just hard reporting on wars or politics, it’s the scoop on a celebrity’s trip to the coffee shop or the breaking story of a twitter fight between to athletes. Hollywoodization of the news is no doubt a real issue. With the increased amount of news outlets in the past decade alone, some of the nations top sources have had to adapt to the interests of the public. Since we can pick and choose what we read or what we look to read it’s hard to keep a reader’s attention with a headline about the Gaza Strip when their eyes could so easily peer over to a TMZ article about Justin Bieber and Selena Gomez. Personalized news is a growing trend on the internet, with users being able to customize what types of news articles appear on their homepage in order to see their interests fulfilled immediately upon opening their browser. According to a Pew Research Center study, “28% of internet users have customized their home page to include news from sources and on topics that particularly interest them” (Purcell). It’s because of this we see such a drastic injection of Hollywood into news that might not be about Hollywood at all. Hollywood attracts readership, and readers and advertisers are two of the most important things an organization in this struggling industry needs.
    So where are we getting the news nowadays? The answer is no longer a singular source such as a newspaper or television set, or even the internet for that matter. It’s not even a combination of the three. It’s each other. For so long the news was a mere feed, a one-way street in which readers or viewers were given information by a journalist. We sought that information and were satisfied once it was delivered. News, however, is no longer like this. With the advent of social media news is becoming more participatory, we feed the news back to others and even back to the sources themselves in a two-way channel of communication. “37% of internet users have have contributed to the creation of news, commented about it, or disseminated it via postings on social media sites” (Purcell).
    The combinations of these two points of information as well as the glaringly obvious fact that news has gone mobile shine a glimpse of light on why Hollywood is such a prominent feature in our daily news sources. “33% of cell phone owners now access news on their cell phones” (Purcell), and 68% of smart phone users find that the platform “makes it easy to stay informed no matter where I go” (Magid). With this constant availability of news right in the palm of your hand it’s almost impossible for legitimate hard news stories to keep up with the immediate reporting of a celebrity's mundane activities. Any celebrity can go outside without makeup, get bombarded by the paparazzi and have a story written about them in fifteen minutes. Real news can’t appear out of thin air like that. An editorial on the President’s inaugural address for instance is intriguing and informative I’m sure, but after an hour it’s a dead read. People are impatient, they want news now. The problem is news doesn’t just appear out of thin air. Except in one place, Hollywood. Stephanie raises a great question. “Should Hollywoodization and infotainment continue to be a part of American culture and in the news” (Matuszkiewicz)? I don’t think we really have a choice. It will be whether we want it to or not, and if technology continues to innovate and antagonize our impatient impulses for getting the latest information, it might only get worse.

    Work Cited
    Magid, Frank N. "Newspaper Multiplatform Usage." Newspaper Association of America (2012): Web.
    Purcell, Kristen, Lee Rainie, Amy Mitchell, Tom Rosenstiel, and Kenny Olmstead. "Understanding the Participatory News Consumer." Pew Research Center, 1 Mar. 2010. Web.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I compare the social developments and changes in our society to construction at a university. When Quinnipiac was covered in blue tarp and metal fences I sometimes became frustrated by this sight and it seemed like the construction was never going to end. My father made a good point by saying that change was the best thing to see and this is a very positive thing. There are opinions similar to mine about the news media converging with the digital world. Revenue for various news organizations has decreased due to their lack of transformation with the times. Audiences tend to love it or hate it; older generations crave the way news used to be presented and experience frustrations like the ones I originally had about construction at school. New digital formats are undeniable, “…there is no choice but to get to know the “frenemy.” Social media – particularly Facebook, with its huge audience and domineering lead – have become a partner no news organization can afford to ignore.” (Olmstead)
    An area in the news that I believe to be lacking is local news. CNN and other major networks are being smart about reaching users on smart phones and tablets. Most suburban cities and towns have allowed their newspapers to be accessed online but this is really where it stops. Now I cannot imagine accessing my town’s news stories on Twitter or Facebook, but maybe it is time for that change. There are an overwhelming amount of users who loyally receive their news in the digital format. The current generation is not going to know anything else and this is the new norm.
    An issue with convenience is that news organizations lose some control over when exactly their audiences hear the news. By observing trends networks can gain some insight into how and when stories are being heard.
    Consumers appear to be using different devices for news at different times of the day. During the early morning on weekdays, comScore data show that news sites receive similar spikes in traffic from smartphones, tablets and computers, as consumers turn to all three to check on the headlines. Later in the day, traffic is higher on computers, as people log in from the office. Between 9 p.m. and midnight, tablets see a more significant spike… (Olmstead)
    After reaching audiences has been accomplished the question of knowing what stories are going to hold their interest is asked. It is apparent that tragedy sells and it is the horrifying stories that are remembered and followed. Following tragedy is entertainment news. Other students have referred to the term, Hollywoodization, and today we have networks devoted to celebrity news and they are incredibly successful.
    We must recognize and adapt to change as it comes because ‘construction’ is motivating and normally leads to success and longevity. Converting to digital news is not the last major social change to occur, I wonder what the next innovation we will be analyzing.

    Olmstead, Kenny, Jane Sasseen, Amy Mitchell, and Tom Rosenstiel. "Digital: News Gains Audience but Loses Ground in Chase for Revenue." N.p., n.d. Web. 9 Feb. 2013

    ReplyDelete
  18. Fine way of telling, and pleasant paragraph to get data regarding my
    presentation subject matter, which i am going to present in college.



    Feel free to surf to my site - sports 2011

    ReplyDelete
  19. Do you mind if I quote a couple of your articles as long as I provide credit
    and sources back to your webpage? My blog site is in
    the exact same niche as yours and my visitors would definitely benefit from some
    of the information you provide here. Please let
    me know if this ok with you. Thanks!

    My weblog: voucher codes

    ReplyDelete