Report on US Media: More is less...

The Project for Excellence in Journalism released its Annual Report on US Media last Sunday.

In short it concludes that "consumers have more places than ever to get their news but fewer stories are being covered and with less depth".

Here are the major findings in a bit more detail and related to new media and the blogosphere:

• Journalism becomes faster, looser and cheaper: "The blogosphere, while adding the richness of citizen voices, expands this culture of assertion exponentially, and brings to it an affirmative philosophy: publish anything, especially points of view, and the reporting and verification will occur afterward in the response of fellow bloggers."

So what the report is saying is that the blogosphere and bloggers are putting real pressure on traditional media to publish faster and without fact checking...? Really... On the other hand the report goes on saying that this "pressure" is making it easier for manipulators (government, corporations, pressure groups) to influence public opinion.

• The idea that people have retreated to their ideological corners for news is exaggerated: "Not only do Republicans and Democrats consume most news media outlets in similar levels, but those in both parties who distrust the news media are often heavier consumers of news outlets than those who are more trusting. The political makeup of the network news audience, for instance, matches that of the Weather Channel."

The Weather Channel, I like that comparison. Even here in Belgium, where most newspapers originated out of political movements/parties, people tend to get their news were they find it. Gone are the times that you had to read De Morgen if you were more politically inclined to the left.

• To adapt, journalism may have to move in the direction of making its work more transparent [...]: "They (the media) may have to document their reporting process more openly so that audiences can decide for themselves whether to trust it. Doing so would help inoculate their work from the rapid citizen review that increasingly will occur online and elsewhere."

Transparency yes but on the other hand, we would kill real journalism and the freedom of expression if sources are not protected at all cost. Belgium has, as is traditional in this country, a very nuanced approach to this. Sources are "protected" but not "secret". And if you are not a professional reporter (= you do not report news as a professional activity) then you have no right to the protection of your sources. which leaves out most Belgian bloggers today I am afraid. (Voor de nederlandstalligen onder ons, lees de post van LVB).

Read more about this report here.

As a footnote but interesting because I think this would give different results in Europe; the report also looked at the believes of the general American public and how these correlate with the believes of the journalists who participated to this report:

On the statement "Personal Freedom versus Government Safety Net :

National journalists are divided over this question - 49% place higher priority on freedom from government interference while 42% say it is more important that the government play an active role to guarantee aid to the needy. Opinion among Internet journalists divides along similar lines: 51% believe freedom from government interference is more important; 43% say a government guarantee of aid for the needy is more important.

Source: Canadian Broadcasting Corporation

Technorati Tags : media, report, journalism.org, Pew+Charitable+Trusts, Columbia+University, blogging, journalism, squarespace

Powered By Qumana