TV News: A Structure Of Reassurance, By Joyce Nelson

In an era of global technology, instant news, infomercials, electronic town meetings, and “Made for TV Documentaries,” the borderlines between news and analysis, news and entertainment, news and fiction are constantly shifting.

Today’s media (news) plays an enormous role in the lives of people in directing a specific perception of the world around them. Most often media conduct's a subconscious effect upon its spectators in which the upshots are deliberately or illdeliberatly towards a particular topic.

Having served nearly thirty years at CBS News, Mr. Goldberg had earned a reputation as one of the most original writers and thinkers in broadcast journalism. However, when he observed his own industry, he realized the liberal media had completely missed their mission to give honest news. After years of sharing his observations and promoting more balanced reportings, Goldberg soon realized that no one listened because they believed they were doing the right thing. The liberal bias continued, therefore Bernard Goldberg decided to take the situation into his own hands and expose the distortion of the media himself. Goldberg’s breathtaking and shocking best seller book, Bias, reveals the close-mindedness of the news culture and their mission to entertain rather than share facts.

Now I realise it seems a bit hypocritical of me to attack the media’s representation of a news event when I myself am a part of the hype-generating circus we call mass media. However, the voice of my wise, high-school English teacher echoes in my subconscious that we should always be critical of the texts we consume and conscious of the

In an effort to expose the epistemology of television, which Postman believes has not been effectively addressed, he examines the effects of TV on several important American cultural institutions: news, religion, politics and education.  All four institutions, Postman argues, have realized that they have to go on television in order to be noticed which, in turn, requires them to learn the language of TV if they are to reach the people.  Therefore, they have joined the national conversation not on their own terms, but on TV's terms.  Postman contends that this transformation of our major institutions has trivialized what is most important about them and turned our culture into "one vast arena for show business" (80).  In the case of broadcast news, we see visually stimulating, disconnected stories about murder and mayhem along with a healthy dose of infotainment delivered by friendly and likeable anchors that remind us to "tune in tomorrow".  In the case of politics, we have discourse through distorted paid TV commercials and "debates" in which the appearance of having said something important is

In the late 1950s and into the 1960s responsibility played a large role in how news was distributed. Three television networks, ABC, CBS, and NBC, were among the outlets with formally trained news anchors who brought forth a sense of unity in the country. But, as the years progressed and people began to develop special interests, the ways news was relayed transformed (Turow, 1997, p. 40).

TV news viewership has declined steadily over the past two decades. Several factors may have contributed to the decline: busy lifestyles, lack of interest, and the rise of the Internet. As viewership has declined, the remaining viewers have aged. Today, the average evening news viewer is 60 years old. TV networks' response to these changes has largely been negative. They have dropped hard news in favor of opinion pieces, "puff pieces," and stories that are of interest only to their older demographic. As a result, TV news has not just become unpopular, it has also become largely worthless.

The popularity of television developed in the 1950’s, but the power of television as a medium secured its place in the 1960’s. This is demonstrated statistically in a Roper research poll aimed to investigate American television habits and related attitudes (Small 12). Adult participants were asked how they received most of their news about world current events and were then given options including television, newspapers, magazines or radio. In 1959, 57% identified newspapers over television; by 1969, television had taken the lead as the preferred source as stated by 64% of individuals (13). Participants were also asked which source they would be more inclined to believe if they experienced conflicting reports of the same news story. In the 1959 poll, the results showed television slightly behind newspapers, but the 1969 responses showed an increase of 44% choosing television as a more trusted source over 21% identifying newspapers. Again, the enchantment with television was revealed when more than half of the respondents identified TV as the option most likely to keep if forced to choose between the four previously mentioned mediums (13). The changes exhibited over a decade reveal the public’s budding dependence on television broadcast news.

The coincidence of the growth of television with the first military defeat for America was used by the government to explain why the war was lost: it wasn’t because of government policy or by underestimating the enemy but because television journalism and lack of censorship that undermined the whole operation “by ‘graphic and unremitting distortion’ of the facts, pessimism, and unvarnished depiction of both Americas youthful casualties and American ‘atrocities’ inflicted on the Vietnamese.” The amount of televisions in America was on the increase; ‘In 1950, only 9 percent of homes owned a television. By 1966, this figure rose to 93 percent.’ This alone shows the sheer coverage that the news had and the potential influence that it could impose upon the minds of the people. Not only did more people have television sets in their homes but more and more people were relying on television over any other medium to obtain their news. The survey conducted by the Roper organisation for the Television Information Office in 1972 shows us that 64% of people got most of their news from television, an 8% increase from the survey conducted in 1964. Another factor in the power of television was not just the fact that it reached a wide audience, it was also the fact that people were more likely to believe what the television news said over reports in the newspaper or radio, especially if the reports were conflicting in nature. This was due to two factors; the personality who

Postman (1987) claims that television is an evil that destroys the purpose and complexities of public discourse. He argues that important issues are oversimplified and drowned in a sea of irrelevance. Chaffee and Metzger (2001) confirm this assumption by remarking the evolution of print and radio into television and television into new media. Establishing the similarities between Postman’s chief complaints about the television medium and the new media then rearing its ugly head. Chaffee and Metzger indicate the shift in the denotations of mass, media, and communication. With technological advancements, it is impossible to ignore the new media and its impact on modern culture.

When it comes to finding about the news of what’s going on in our world, we want details and facts. We want the juice of what’s actually going on. The debate between the efficiency of newspapers and TV news, TV news is a lot more effective.

The research for this article was conducted within a framework of Framing theory. The theory was first put forward by a Canadian-American sociologist Erving Goffman. Media framing, to put it bluntly, is a term that points to a presence of a certain bias in any media outlets’ output. All choices made in a newsroom collectively form the frame through which media decides to show the world to the audiences. Everything matters: Covering one event and ignoring another, covering one event more than the other, deciding what words to use to cover an event, what photographs or video clips to include, whom to give a voice, etc. At the same time, framing theory goes far beyond newsroom policies. Framing is not necessarily a delibirate choice. Journalists themselves look at the world through frames: their education, upbringing, gender, ethnical background, knowledge of the issue, and so on. Audience members apply their own frames as well, not just to media content, but to everything they hear and see.

What was astonishing was not the rapidity of the news- that is, after all, the beauty of modern broadcasting technology- but the effect that the news had on the public. In the following weeks and months, story after story demonstrated the

Thousands of our nation's men and women were fighting for their country, yet the media limited the amount of information that they chose to pass on to the public. Each day the media is faced with the choice of making decisions of what news to pass on, when that news could make a significant difference in someone's life, or in the fate of our nation.

Television, a telecommunication medium some may not survive without. Today’s generation may refer to television as a technological norm; delusional of a world where television was non-existent. Notably, television unites the nation through local or world events, politics, education, and entertainment. Philo Farnsworth, “Father of Television,” invented the television; the electronic transmission of fixed or mobile images. Furthermore, Farnsworth’s invention influenced a new form of media. Young Farnsworth’s scientific, technological imagination as well as, competitive battle with a major-league corporation, RCA, enticed the growth of one of the most popular media mediums; television.