|
The Gazette, Colorado Springs: Sensationalism
Major initiative
The public’s complaint that newspapers chase and over-cover
sensational stories appears to involve a clash of values between journalists
and readers. When journalists decide what is news, they apply a set of
values that tell them that Monica Lewinsky, or a triple ax-murder belongs
on A-1. Readers and citizens tell us their value set is different when
they say, "this is something I need to know about, but don’t hit me over
the head with it." The Gazette is going to explore this values conflict
in two ways.
Four times during 1999, a specific segment of the community
— such as African-Americans, economically disadvantaged whites, or conservative
religious groups — will be asked to audit a few weeks of the paper, focusing
on a specific area (e.g., race, gender, religion, etc.). The audit group
will prepare a report outlining what news values they see reflected in
The Gazette, and how they react to what they see on the pages. The Gazette’s
staff will then react to the report in writing (explaining why some things
were done, responding to criticism, etc.). The final step in the process
is the audit group’s response to that response: explaining/expanding on
their initial reactions as well as commenting on the staff’s reaction to
their analysis. The Gazette will publish all three reports to open the
conversation to a broader audience, and provide a forum in which to help
readers better understand what was done and why. This project, and other
efforts also, may lead to practices designed to minimize the erosion of
credibility.
The second part of The Gazette’s initiative investigates
the perceived influence of a newspaper’s editorial opinion on its news
decisions. After completing a survey to determine (a) market awareness
of the Gazette’s editorial positions, (b) agreement with those positions,
and (c) perceptions of whether each opinion has influenced the paper’s
news coverage of that area, one topic will be chosen for further study.
Two sub-samples, one drawn from respondents to the survey and another drawn
from professionals involved in that area, will review a topically specific
package of Gazette editorials and news stories. They will be asked to identify
specific instances where they see news judgments they believe were influenced
by editorial opinions.
Import to the JCP
The national research makes clear that one way that the
public explains sensationalism and bias they perceive in news coverage
is with common-sense (i.e., "they’re doing that just to sell more papers").
Another way, however, is to attribute a deeper motive to decisions they
see reflected on the news pages (i.e., "that just reflects their agenda"
or "they just don’t care enough about that group to get it right"). Clarifying
the relative degree to which each of these explanations are applied by
specific community groups to specific news content is an important part
of the JCP. Not only will it increase understanding of what the public
"reads into" headline wording, story language and framing, photo choices,
and layout decisions, but it can also sensitize newsrooms to the unintended
messages they might be sending with the exercise of traditional journalistic
values. In the process, the JCP will learn much more about the values conflict
that underlies credibility problems, and have an opportunity to scrutinize
journalistic values and decision-making responses — some of which might
be altered by the feedback obtained in this experiment. In both parts of
this initiative, it’s the specificity of real-life examples from the newspaper’s
pages that defines the analysis, and increases the relevance of this inquiry
to ASNE’s members.
JCP test method
After completion of the four audit groups, the three-part
reports will be analyzed as a set to determine whether there are any common
themes, or particular "signals" of sensationalism and bias to readers that
supersede their particular interests or sensitivities. The study of perceived
editorial-page influence on news judgments will generate both quantitative
and qualitative information — the former amplifying findings of the JCP’s
national research and the latter to examine three levels of potential "value
conflict" — the journalists’, the involved parties’, and the public’s at
large.
Supporting initiatives
In addition to its major initiative, the Gazette will
experiment with:
-
Bylining headlines and story editors (soon page designers
and cutline writers).
-
Running a weekly column called "Our Journalism" that explains
the process of and reasons behind news decisions, and invites reader comment
and participation in making decisions.
-
Putting news meetings on the Internet via live streaming
video and audio.
For more information, contact Steve Smith, editor, at
719/636-0103; e-mail: editor@gazette.com
|
