1.4 News, Commentary & Opinion, and New Media
Learning Objectives
After reading this section, you should be able to answer the following questions:
- What is news?
- How do journalists acquire the news? How is the news presented?
- Where in the media can you find opinion and commentary?
- What are the four leading influences of the media on politics and government?
- What are the four ways the new media are changing the relationship between communication on the one hand and government and politics on the other?
The News
Information about or relevant to politics, government, and public policies commonly appears in the mass media in the form of news. News is a selective account of what happens in the world. Common subjects are violence (wars), crime (school shootings), natural disasters (earthquakes, hurricanes), and scandals (sexual, financial). The statements and actions of powerful or prominent people are news. So are human interest stories. News is timely, a breaking event, like an assassination attempt on a president. Or newly revealed information, such as a presidential candidate’s drunk-driving conviction, even if it happened years ago. Slow-moving processes that may be of vital importance (e.g., the spread of AIDS or global warming) take time to become news, often requiring a “peg”—the release of an alarmist study, a congressional hearing, or presidential speech—on which to hang the story.
Journalists
News is reported by journalists. They work under time pressure with tight deadlines to come up with stories around the clock. This job has become more difficult in recent years as budget cuts have led news organizations to demand more stories for more outlets from fewer reporters.
Any influence of reporters’ characteristics and opinions on their stories is limited by the norms of objectivity they learn in journalism school or on the job. Specified in the profession’s code of ethics, these include reporting accurate information, not deliberately distorting or plagiarizing, and separating reporting from advocacy (Society of Professional Journalists, 1996). Journalists are expected to report different sides of an issue, be impartial and fair, and exclude their personal opinions (Mindich, 1998).
Acquiring the News
Journalists follow standard procedures to obtain the news. They go to the scene, especially of wars and disasters. They talk to people who have participated in, witnessed, or claim to know what happened. They dig into records. Easing their job, many events, such as press conferences, trials, and elections, are scheduled ahead of time.
News organizations guarantee stories by assigning reporters to cover distinct beats such as the White House or specific subjects such as environmental policy. Institutions and subjects not on reporters’ beats (off the beaten track, so to speak) generate few stories unless they do something to become newsworthy. Sometimes events thrust them into prominence, as when the banking crisis of 2008 raised questions about the regulatory effectiveness of the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Journalists interact with and rely extensively on sources—generally people in government and politics, especially those in high positions of authority—to provide them with scoops and quotations. Other sources are whistle-blowers, who reveal information they have about dubious activities, outrages, or scandals. Depending on their motives, sources either provide information openly and unreservedly or leak it subject to various conditions such as anonymity (Hess, 1984). Often the reporter-source relationship is symbiotic: they need each other. Reporters need sources for news. Sources need reporters to get their views and information into the news, to obtain favorable coverage.
Journalists may acquire information from Governmental sources as well. These may include: Government reports, Legislative committees, regulatory agencies, and governmental departments and commissions conduct investigations, hold hearings, and issue reports and press releases. Journalists sometimes draw on these sources for their stories.
The mass media rely on the wire services for much of their international and national news. Wire services cover and transmit stories worldwide from their own staff and from reporters who work for the many newspapers and other organizations that belong to the services. Prominent wire services are the Associated Press (AP) and Reuters. The AP sends news to approximately 1,700 newspapers, 5,000 radio and television stations, and 8,500 other media outlets in over 100 countries. Video feeds supplied by the AP and Reuters are the source of much of the televised international news.
Prominence and Presentation
As a result of widely agreed-upon criteria of newsworthiness, the process of gathering the news, and the use of news services, the news media often report many of the same stories. Only a few stories are featured prominently due to limitations in broadcast prime time and front-page print space. Nonetheless, there are some differences among the media in the range and type of news on which they focus.
The media also differ stylistically in how they present the news. The New York Times does it with relative sobriety. Cable channels dramatize their reports by announcing “breaking news,” using graphic captions, accompanying stories with pulsating music, engaging in fast-paced editing, and repeatedly admonishing viewers to “stay with us.” Television news is picture driven: stories with appealing, dramatic, or even available camera footage are more likely to be played prominently than those without. Viewers are unaware of what is not shown, what happened before or after the picture was taken, and whether or not the shot was staged. Camera angles, distance from the subject, especially close-ups, length of shot, camera movement, and editing all influence viewers’ impressions. A picture may be worth a thousand words, but it can also mislead. Technological advances and computer software have allowed for the creation of images that look real, and involve real people, but have been totally fabricated and posted online to generate buzz and viewership, but leads to the spread of fake news and misinformation.
Interactions and Types of Coverage
As we document throughout our book, people involved in public life understand that their election and reelection, their effectiveness in elected and appointed office, and their ability to achieve their policies often depend on how they and their deliberations and debates, disagreements and conflicts, cooperation and consensus, actions and inactions, and struggles for power, are portrayed by the media. They know that media depictions can influence people’s opinions, understandings of policy problems and notions of solutions, and can encourage or discourage participation in politics. They know that information is power. The more of it they have before others the better. They present (spin) their behavior, activities, and actions, and policies and decisions, as positively as possible; they conceal, minimize, or put the best gloss on their mistakes and blunders. They engage in public appearances, make speeches, hold press conferences, and stage newsworthy events. They also deploy an arsenal of savvy techniques such as brief, pithy phrases known as sound bites. Behind the scenes they bestow favors, such as giving access to sympathetic journalists; persuade; apply pressure; and engage in intimidation (Cook, 2005; Paletz, 2012). Despite these attempts at manipulation, the news media’s coverage of people in public life is not necessarily favorable.
Commentary and Opinion
The media do far more than report the news. They are full of pundits, talking heads, and partisans who are busy expressing opinions and commenting on the news. These reactions and responses can contribute to a marketplace of ideas, informed public discussion, and greater understanding of politics, government, and public policies. Often, however, they result in conflict and cacophony: topics are broached too briefly in too little time, assertions dominate analysis, and shouting and squabbling drown out thought.
Media Sources
Most newspapers contain editorials expressing opinions about the events of the day. The New York Times’s stance is liberal; the Wall Street Journal’s is conservative. They supplement their editorials with opinion columns from regular contributors. A few newspapers add op-eds. These are opinions from people unaffiliated with the paper. Cartoons, when the newspaper features them, often comment critically on public officials, policies, and current events. Television and Radio
The television networks’ Sunday morning interview programs usually feature prominent policymakers, including government officials and well-known politicians. There is Meet the Press, Face the Nation, and This Week. In the face of sometimes aggressive questioning by the host and interview panelists, guests strive to set the news agenda and get their messages across to viewers. The programs, which have small audiences, are influential because they are widely watched in Washington, DC and by people interested in government and politics.
Twenty-four-hour cable-television news channels report the news. However, despite their claims to separate news from opinion, the two often blend together. Oftentimes, these channels employ a partisan spin to their choice of topics, how they frame the events, and the reporting that is done on the issue. For example, CNN has The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer, and MSNBC has The Rachel Maddow Show, which present a liberal-leaning, Democratic Party supporting, stance on issues. For a mainly conservative, pro-Republican perspective, there is cable’s most popular news channel, Fox News, featuring partisan, opinionated talk-show hosts and commentators, Sean Hannity and Tucker Carlson. Channels similar to these have a lot of time to fill and only a limited number of reporters and news-gathering resources. So they employ opinionated anchors and fill their news programs with commentary and opinion, often from pundits, political consultants, party strategists, and people from interest groups and ideological think tanks. Even though these shows have relatively small audiences, the people watching “are the news junkies, the ones who get the buzz going” (Fitzwater, 2007).
Over two thousand radio stations employ a news-talk format. Hosts have ample time to vent their opinions and cultivate, cajole, and castigate their callers and listeners (Brewer, 1993). These radio talk show hosts can be very similar in their treatment of the “news” from a liberal or conservative perspective. The bulk of talk show radio tends to be more conservative.
Comedy can venture where other entertainment forms fear to tread. Comedy has a point of view, presents an argument, usually from a more liberal perspective. Political satire, the use of humor, exaggeration, ridicule or irony to criticize the perceived absurdity, or stupidity, of a person or group’s position on political or current issue, is often used to both make light of situations, but also can be a clever and intellectual way to shine light on a serious issue.
Media Influences on Politics, Government, and Public Policies
The chart below offers a summary of the influences Media may have Politics, Government, and Public Policy. Each influence is described in more detail below.
| Media Influence | Definition |
| Agenda Setting | Power to tell people WHAT topics or issues to think about |
| Framing | Power to influence HOW people think about a topic or issue |
| Priming | Power to give the criteria to judge WHO is responsible for acting/inacting on topics or issues |
| Mobilizing | Power to encourage individuals/groups to engage in certain political behaviors |
Agenda Setting
A series of experiments has demonstrated that when television news places more attention and emphasis on certain issues, such as crime, the public tends to see those issues as more important problems requiring government action. The public then judges politicians according to how well they respond to the issues (Iyenger & Kinder, 1987).
This agenda-setting power of the media, in effect, tells people what to think about. The flip side of agenda setting is that when the media ignore issues or policy areas, so too does the public. Thus for people involved in government or politics, getting an issue in the media, or keeping it out of the media, is important; the agenda influences the public’s understandings of what should be done by policymakers.
Framing
The media are not simply important in getting people to think about an issue; they influence how people think about it. Scholars refer to this media power as framing (Schaffner & Sellers, 2010). Journalists bring a perspective to bear on events, highlight certain aspects at the expense of others, to create a coherent narrative (Reese, Gandy Jr., & Grant, 2001). Such a narrative names protagonists and antagonists, identifies some of the causes of the event described, outlines moral judgments, and may suggest solutions. Framing is inherent in the process of selecting, editing, organizing, and presenting stories. It is often expressed in the television anchorperson’s introduction and in newspaper headlines and opening paragraphs. The meaning of an event can change dramatically based on how it is framed by and in the media. For example, the public understands a demonstration quite differently depending on whether the news frames it as an exercise of freedom of speech or as a threat to law and order.
Priming
Media frames can provide criteria that audience members use to make judgments about government institutions, public officials, and issues. This is called priming. It can occur when news stories identify the person or institution to blame for an event, such as the damage wrought by Hurricane Katrina on New Orleans. The president is often held responsible for the nation’s problems. Priming effects are strongest “when the news frames a problem as if it were the president’s business, when viewers are prepared to regard the problem as important, and when they see the problem as entangled in the duties and obligation of the presidency” (Iyengar & Kinder, 1987).
Mobilizing
The media affect what people think about in politics and how they think about it. They also influence what, if anything, people do about politics, problems, and policies. Media contents can mobilize individuals to engage in political behavior, from contacting public officials, to voting, to protesting, to committing violence. In the 1960s, television coverage increased participation in the nonviolent protests of the civil rights movement against segregation in the South (Lee, 2002). Continuous coverage of the 2009 health care legislation contributed to generating a wide range of participation by the public. Partisan media particularly foster citizen engagement in politics, as Fox News did for the Tea Party.
The media can influence people in politics without the public being involved at all. Politicians are far more voracious consumers of the news than is the average American. When issues are heavily covered in the media, officials take such prominence as a sign that they may well be called to account for their actions, even if the public has not yet spoken out. And they speak and behave differently than they did when the issues were obscure. Media attention tends to encourage action and speed up the policy process, if only for politicians to get the issue off the table.
New Media
New Media is not entirely “new.” The early 1980s saw the development of new technologies to provide digital content to existing traditional mass media in new combinations. They are muddying if not eliminating the differences between media. On the iPad, newspapers, television, and radio stations look similar: they all have text, pictures, video, and links.
Increasingly, Americans are obtaining information on personal devices from websites, blogs, discussion boards, video-sharing sites, such as YouTube, and social networking sites, like Facebook, Twitter, and TikTok. And of course, there is the marvel of Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia to which so many people (four hundred million every month) go to for useful, if not always reliable, information. New media are changing the relationship between communication and government and politics in four significant ways.
Making More Information Available and Accessible
News organizations, with their legitimacy and experienced journalists, have gone online. They often add details and links missing from their broadcast or published versions of their stories. Their sophisticated technology keeps their sites fresh with the latest news, photos, and real-time audio and video. Journalists incorporate the Internet into their reporting. They read the sites of other news organizations, get story ideas, background information, check facts, search for and receive press releases, and download data.
Consumers of information today have the power of the entire internet at their disposal with their personal electronic devices and cell phones. While this has made information more available it has also, however, accelerated disparities between those who have the financial means to afford a device, and pay for the monthly services, and those who cannot afford them.
Narrowcasting
The new media can aim at more discrete, specialized audiences, narrowcasting rather than broadcasting. Often controlled by individual communicators, their content is usually aimed at smaller and more socially, economically, and perhaps politically distinct audiences than the mass media. This fragmentation of the mass audience means that the old mass-media pursuit of lowest-common-denominator content may no longer be financially necessary or viable. There are not only cable channels, but also podcasts, devoted to women, African Americans, and Hispanics, as well as for buffs of news, weather, history, sports, and just about any other topic you can think of. Technology has enabled satellites and provided for wireless internet which broadcasts a clear signal to people anywhere in the world. Listeners have hundreds, perhaps thousands, of program options to choose from, further narrowing their choice of focus.
Creating Content
As major news organizations have gone online, they have hired technologically skilled young people. At first, these people would primarily reprocess content. Now they create it, as they know how to take advantage of the technology. Thanks to cell-phone cameras, webcams, and social networks, ordinary people can create, store, sort, share, and show digital images and videos. YouTube is the go-to website for finding obscure and topical streaming video clips. Home videos, remixes, and television excerpts are posted by users (also by the television networks). YouTube has millions of videos and daily viewers.
People can become citizen journalists and create contents by reporting on subjects usually ignored by the news media. They can also become citizen journalists as eyewitnesses to events. As occurred in the killing of George Floyd by Minneapolis Police Officers, bystanders recorded much of what had happened while documenting the incident. Mainstream media picked up on the events and incorporated the citizen journalism into their news products.
Blogging
Blogs are online diaries whose authors post information, including ideas and opinions. Blogs may permit feedback from readers and provide hyperlinks to other online contents that may enrich the discussion. Many people blog, but few are widely read. Nonetheless, there are thousands of political blogs on the web. Blogging can be seen as a new form of journalism without deadlines or broadcast schedules. But it does not replace reporting. Most bloggers rely on material issued elsewhere for their information: domestic and foreign newspapers, government documents, academic papers, and other media.
Nonetheless, the “blogosphere” can hold public officials accountable by amplifying and spreading information. Bloggers can also hold the news media accountable. One important way is by challenging the media’s framing of a story or by challenging the media’s stories themselves. On the 60 Minutes Wednesday segment of September 8, 2005, anchor Dan Rather presented documents purportedly showing that President George W. Bush had received preferential treatment in joining the Texas Air National Guard in the early 1970s and thus avoided military service in Vietnam. The report was a scoop that had been rushed onto the air. Conservative Internet forums and bloggers immediately pointed out that, because of their format and typography, the documents were forged. The accusation quickly gained national attention by the news media and was soon corroborated. Rather’s long career at CBS was ended sooner than he and the network had planned.
Limitations
The ability of new media to realize their potential and promise for improving citizen education and enhancing public life is limited in five ways.
First, political websites and bloggers generally lack the resources of the news media and the knowledge and expertise of journalists to cover and investigate government, politics, and public policies in depth. They react to rather than originate the news.
Second, the new media encourage people to expose themselves to contents (people and perspectives) they already agree with, thereby creating confirmation bias, seeking and using sources that appear to confirm a conclusion you want others to have, while ignoring refuting evidence. The audience for Fox News is overwhelmingly Republican, while Democrats gravitate to MSNBC. Liberals find stories that support their views on the HuffPost, conservatives on the National Review Online. Liberal blogs link to other liberal blogs, conservative blogs to other conservative blogs.
Third, the new media are rife with muddle and nonsense, distortion and error, thus perpetuating the spread of misinformation and “fake news.” Worse, the new media are a fount of rumor, innuendo, invective, and lies. Even worse, the new media can promote and express anger, hatred, rage, and fanaticism.
Fourth is the possibility of the new media falling increasingly under the control of media conglomerates and giant corporations. Google has purchased YouTube, Facebook purchased Instagram (now collectively called Meta). This could eventually subject them to the same demands placed on the mass media: how to finance the production of content and make a profit. Indeed, advertising has become far more prevalent in and on the new media.
Fifth, the new media are a threat to privacy. Google logs all the searches made on it and stores the information indefinitely. Social Media sites use viewing data to customize the ads that individuals see. There have been increasing pressures for governmental regulations to prevent the sharing of private data collected by companies with other third parties.
Political Potential
The new media are rife with political potential. They can convey a wide range of information and views. There are sites for people of every political persuasion interested in any policy issue (e.g., drugs, education, health, environment, immigration). These sites can encourage discussion and debate, stimulate political participation, raise funds, mobilize voters, and inspire civic engagement.
The new media allow politicians, political parties, interest and advocacy groups, as well as individuals to bypass the traditional media and reach the public. They can try to control their image by deciding what information to release and selecting congenial media through which to communicate it—to their benefit but not necessarily our enlightenment.
The new media offer people the potential opportunity to transcend the mass media. As newspaper columnist Thomas L. Friedman wrote rather hyperbolically, “When everyone has a blog, a MySpace page or Facebook entry, everyone is a publisher. When everyone has a cell phone with a camera in it, everyone is a paparazzo. When everyone can upload video on YouTube, everyone is a filmmaker. When everyone is a publisher, paparazzo or filmmaker, everyone else is a public figure” (Friedman, 2007).
Key Takeaways
In this section, we have explained how journalists decide what is news, how they acquire news and how they present news. We have described the techniques that people in public life use to manage and manipulate the news media to obtain positive and avoid negative depictions. Also in this section, we have identified the incidence of opinion and commentary in the media. They are prevalent in newspapers and magazines, on television and radio, and in comedy. We then described four leading influences of the media on politics, government, and public policies. These are agenda setting, framing, priming, and mobilizing.
Exercises
- What makes something news? How do journalists decide what to report as news?
- What factors determine how journalists cover politics? When is their coverage of politicians more likely to be favorable, and when is it more likely to be critical?
- According to the Society of Professional Journalists’ (SPJ) Code of Ethics, professional journalists should seek the truth and report it. Their code states, “Ethical journalism should be accurate and fair. Journalists should be honest and courageous in gathering, reporting and interpreting information.” In the United States, we license doctors, teachers, electricians, etc., but not journalists. In your opinion, should the government license professionally trained journalists to set them apart from the average citizen who posts their own version of the “news?” Why or why not?
- How can humor be used to influence public opinion? Why might satire be more effective than straight opinion in making political points?
- How does blogging differ from traditional journalism? What are the advantages of blogging as a form of journalism? What are the disadvantages?
- In what sense do new media make everyone potentially a journalist? Do you agree that this also makes everyone potentially a public figure?
References
Baym, G., “The Daily Show: Discursive Integration and the Reinvention of Political Journalism,” Political Communication 22, no. 3 (July–September 2005): 259–76
Bennett, W. L., “An Introduction to Journalism Norms and Representations of Politics,” Political Communication 13, no. 4 (October–December 1996): 373–84.
Bennett, W. L., Regina G. Lawrence, and Steven Livingston, When the Press Fails: Political Power and the News Media from Iraq to Katrina (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2007) for a thoughtful analysis of when and why the news media are lap dogs and watchdogs (the “Gone Wild” example is on p. 167).
Brewer, A. M., Talk Shows & Hosts on Radio, 2nd ed. (Dearborn, MI: Whitefoord Press, 1993).
Brooks, D., “Live from 400,” The New Yorker, November 13, 2000, 122.
Cook, T. E., Governing with the News: The News Media as a Political Institution, 2nd ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2005).
Dickens, S., ed., The Onion Presents Our Dumb Century (New York: Three Rivers Press, 1999).
Ettema, J. S. and Theodore L. Glasser, Custodians of Conscience: Investigative Journalism and Public Virtue (New York: Columbia University Press, 1998).
Fitzwater, M. quoted in Martha Joynt Kumar, Managing the President’s Message: The White House Communications Operation (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2007), 197.
Hallin, D. C., The Uncensored War: The Media and Vietnam (New York: Oxford University Press, 1986), 116–17.
Hess, S., The Government/Press Connection: Press Officers and Their Offices (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, 1984), chap. 7.
Iyengar, S. and Donald R. Kinder, News That Matters: Television and American Opinion (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987).
Jones, J. P., Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2005).
Lee, T., Mobilizing Public Opinion: Black Insurgency and Racial Attitudes in the Civil Rights Era (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2002).
Lichtblau, E., “Terror Suspects Buying Firearms, Report Finds,” New York Times, March 8, 2005, A1.
Mayer, J., “Whatever It Takes,” The New Yorker, February 19 & 26, 2007, 66–82, esp. 66 and 68.
Mindich, D. T. Z., Just the Facts: How “Objectivity” Came to Define American Journalism (New York: New York University Press, 1998).
Paletz, D. L., The Media in American Politics: Contents and Consequences, 3rd ed. (New York: Longman, 2012).
Parker, A., “Where News Is Power, a Fight to Be Well-Armed,” New York Times, January 18, 2011, A14, 17.
Paletz, S. B. F., “The Irreverent Onion,” Political Communication 21, no. 1 (January–March 2004): 131–34.
Reese, S. D., Oscar H. Gandy Jr., and August E. Grant, eds., Framing Public Life: Perspectives on Media and Our Understanding of the Social World (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 2001).
Rowling, J. K., Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (New York: Scholastic Press, 2000), especially 433–53, 511–15, 611–15, and 726–28; the quotation is on p. 450.
Sabato, L. J., Feeding Frenzy: How Attack Journalism Has Transformed American Politics (New York: Free Press, 1991).
Safire, W., “The Press is the Enemy: Nixon and the Media,” New York, January 27, 1975, 44.
Schaffner, B. F. and Patrick J. Sellers, Winning with Words: The Origins and Impact of Political Framing (New York: Routledge, 2010).
Society of Professional Journalists, Code of Ethics, adopted September 1996.
Dreier, P. and Christopher R. Martin, “How ACORN Was Framed: Political Controversy and Media Agenda Setting,” Perspectives on Politics 8, no. 3 (September 2010): 761–92; the statement that the complete original video has “never been fully disclosed” is on p. 780.
Friedman , T. L., in “Too Good to Check,” his column in the New York Times, October 17, 2010, A27.
Friedman, T. L., “The World Is Watching,” International Herald Tribune, June 28, 2007, 6.
Hindman, M., The Myth of Digital Democracy (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2008).
Khatchadourian, R., “No Secrets,” The New Yorker, June 7, 2010, 40–51.
Levine, P., The Future of Democracy: Developing the Next Generation of American Citizens (Medford, MA: Tufts University Press, 2007).
Peters, J. W. and Brian Stelter, “News Corp Heralds Debut of The Daily, an iPad-Only Newspaper,” New York Times, February 3, 2011, B1 and 4.
Smith-Spark, L., “Young US Voters May Get Scoop in 2008,” BBC News, November 4, 2007.
