media effects – Media Matters

March 4, 2021March 4, 2021

Is the Press Being Too Negative in Reporting on Covid?

The Columbia Journalism Review asked some tough questions in a recent article. Increasing pessimism about the pandemic, and the vaccines, is adding to the collective stress that we’re feeling as a nation. Vaccines are being administered at a rate that will surpass President Biden’s goal of 100 million vaccinated in the first 100 days of his administration, yet members of the press continue to find a pot of coal at the end of the rainbow.

After an incredibly fast development timeline, we now have three vaccines approved by the FDA. Vaccines by Pfizer, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson are being administered across the country with the latest prediction being that all American will have access to a vaccine by the end of May. Yes, there have been minor glitches and attempts by some to game the system; as would be expected. But the progress has been fairly impressive by any measure.

So why the sad faces from so many journalists? If you believe in a model for journalism that makes room for social activism, you might argue that the press must assume the role of provocateur and instigator. Prodding authority figures to do the right thing by pointing out the negative repercussions associated with failure to act is often part of the justification. A more cynical view may be that fear mongering gets clicks and views.

Or perhaps it is the notion that the public must be harangued into falling in line. If the goal is to increase vaccine acceptance, those of us in the press may need to do our part to persuade them to do the right thing. Such a low view of the public’s ability to find, consume, and act on accurate and unbiased information motivates this kind of thinking. And of course with all of the mis- and dis-information that fills our social media feeds it is no wonder that many journalists have become pessimistic about their readers’/viewers’ capabilities when it comes to news consumption.

It has been nearly a year since we were asked to take a few weeks of extreme measures to help “flatten the curve.” That few weeks has stretched into more than a year and more than 30 million Americans have now contracted the virus. And even if we haven’t, most of us know someone who has. Too many know someone who has died from this deadly virus. But despite the bad news, there has been plenty of good news as well and finding the proper balance is important. According to Allsop in CJR…

As Tufekci put it, “effective communication requires a sense of proportion—distinguishing between due alarm and alarmism; warranted, measured caution and doombait; worst-case scenarios and claims of impending catastrophe.” In her view, such balance has a practical benefit: encouraging “people to dream about the end of this pandemic by talking about it more, and more concretely,” she wrote, “can help strengthen people’s resolve to endure whatever is necessary for the moment.”
Tufekci, quoted by Allsop

January 11, 2021January 11, 2021

Big Tech, Political Polarization, and the Assault on Democracy

The Age of Surveillance Capitalism by Zuboff and Why We’re Polarized by Klein

I’ve been catching up on some reading over the holiday break and two books that caught my attention are proving to be quite helpful to understanding the recent events in our nation’s capitol. What we’re witnessing is shocking, but not surprising, to those who have paid attention to the ever-increasing power exerted by Big Tech over every detail of our lives, including our political identities.

Big Tech is shorthand for the companies that control much of our everyday lives through their use of software and hardware designed to capture and hold our attention. And speaking of attention, if I were to add another recent title that addresses this concern it would be The Attention Merchants, by Tim Wu.

By gathering the massive amount of data generated every minute of every day by billions of users, these companies have tapped into a resource that they have turned against us to predict and control our future behavior. Siloing, creation of filter bubbles, nudging users towards certain behaviors, shadow-banning (and now more overt actions to disenfranchise users) are just some of the ways that Big Tech is meddling in the political process. If that sounds like a radical conspiracy theory to you, I urge you to read these books and then we can have a conversation.

And while all of us can agree that what transpired this past week in the halls of congress was both dangerous and disgusting, reasonable people continue to disagree about how to respond to controversial political speech on the leading tech platforms. The ban of the President of the United State by numerous platforms, regardless of your opinions about Trump himself, is cause for concern and should not be taken lightly.

Similarly while the attack on right-wing alternative platforms, e.g. Parler, by Amazon, Apple and Google, may feel like a reasonable and perfectly legal response to unhinged speech that calls for political violence, the danger is to further marginalize and force underground a movement that has enormous popular support.

I’m not suggesting that racists, white-nationalists, and anarchists should have a seat at the table, but I am suggesting that unelected leaders of a few massive tech companies cannot be trusted to make decisions about who gets to participate in our political discourse. This time they may appear to be on your side, but what about when the tables are turned? We’ve given these tech platforms enormous power over the future of our democracy…and that makes me very concerned.

October 18, 2020October 18, 2020

Pro Sports TV Viewership Down

There has been plenty of speculation about why viewership has been down for professional sports this summer and fall. With just a few exceptions, see the chart below, viewers are NOT spending their quarantine time tuning into professional sports.

There are plenty of theories about the collapse of viewership starting with the fact that all of the sports were shifted from their regular seasons. In some cases playoff games from one sport were scheduled across from games from another sport. In fact the NBA championship game between the Lakers and the Heat had to compete with an NFL game between the Seahawks and the Vikings.

Another theory is that the politicization of professional sports has taken a toll on viewers who their sports to be a distraction from the hash reality of life. Social unrest and BLM protests following cases of police brutality became a cause for NBA players and many of their fans. But while many fans may agree with the political stand, they may also want to separate their politics from their sports viewing. The argument against this theory is that sports that have not made strong political statements have also seen lower numbers.

Still another theory is connected to the lack of fans in the stands. According to this theory, TV viewers subconsciously feel this as a statement about reduced importance of the games. Fewer/No fans = low energy = less interest.

What do you think? And if you’re not watching…why not?

March 11, 2020March 11, 2020

The Coronavirus “Infodemic” and Social Media “distancing”

What travels faster and farther than a new virus that causes sickness and even death? Answer: Fear and panic about said virus. Below is a chart that illustrates our current situation.

And guess what viral story about Covid-19 generated the most engagement (likes, comments, shares): a story from Vice about how some people think the virus has a connection to Corona beer. Just for the record, the article’s premise does not appear to be supported by data and is, sadly, another example of hype outperforming credible reporting. And don’t even get me started about ingesting bleach or colloidal silver as a remedy.

Here’s what we do know. The new virus, which is related to the common cold and flu, was first discovered in Wuhan province in China at the end of 2019 and has since spread to dozens of countries, including the hard-hit nations of Italy, S. Korea, and Iran. Because of global trade and travel, the virus quickly began spreading illness, and even death, around the world. The most vulnerable populations are seniors and those with underlying health conditions. But unlike the seasonal flu, with which we’re relatively familiar (even comfortable), this new virus “feels” much more dangerous and has incited widespread panic.

Because of the fact that this coronavirus appears to spread rapidly via droplets (sneezing and coughing), and that a vaccine is likely 12-18 months away, people are justifiably concerned. However, the fear and panic that has accompanied the outbreak is frequently driven by the mis- and dis-information spread via social media.

But here’s where we can have a positive effect. Instead of paying attention to speculation and rumors, and instead of sharing headlines that may be misleading, let’s try to be as careful with our social media behavior as we are with our personal hygiene.

Bottom line: 1) engage in personal hygiene and social distancing to minimize spreading the virus, and 2) on social media take care to “distance” yourself from fear mongering and misinformation. We owe it to each other to do the right thing.

Here are a list of websites providing reliable information:

October 2, 2019October 2, 2019

Concern over Movie is no Joker

According to the MPAA movie-ratings site, Joker is “rated R for strong bloody violence, disturbing behavior, language and brief sexual images.” Scheduled to open in theaters this Friday (Oct 4th), Joker is not an appropriate film for youngsters who may be fans of the Batman franchise.

“Starring Joaquin Phoenix and directed by Todd Phillips, the movie has already been deemed dangerous by its vocal critics, akin to an incel training manual. To some of the movie’s fans, those critical reviews and negative reactions are just another example of social justice warrior overreach. “
Vox

Concerns over dangerous media content have a long history going all the way back to the ancient Greek philosopher Plato who warned about the dangers of writing. Plato was concerned that writing would be a substitute for memory and over time result in forgetfulness. Centuries later, photography was seen as facilitating the sin of idolatry. Motion pictures (film) introduced young audiences to all sorts of vices including lust and violence. Comic books, radio, TV, internet and video games have all suffered the same accusations of endangering young hearts and minds.

But just because we’ve come to dismiss the dangers and fears associated with each new technology does not mean that we should dismiss real threats when they arise. Bullying on social media, addiction to video game play or pornography, and racism and misogyny promoted in anonymous chat rooms and forums: each of these are real threats to physical and mental health and, one can argue, a threat to community.

Based on the trailers for Joker some are questioning whether the film gives too much attention (and cover) to “disaffected white men” whose alienation leads them to act out to get attention. The following tweets capture this sentiment.

In response to criticism the Warner Bros. studio offered this statement.
“Warner Bros. believes that one of the functions of storytelling is to provoke difficult conversations around complex issues. Make no mistake: neither the fictional character Joker, nor the film, is an endorsement of real-world violence of any kind. It is not the intention of the film, the filmmakers or the studio to hold this character up as a hero.”

Not being a big fan of superhero movies–and not one to enjoy gore and extreme violence–I’ll likely sit this one out. But if you see it I’ll be interested to hear what you think. Is it a dangerous film, or are the critics who are passing judgement a greater danger to our collective well-being?

August 21, 2019August 21, 2019

If You Build it They Will Come

If you build the most powerful propaganda platform in the history of communication and make it available for free to a global audience, don’t be surprise when anyone and everyone shows up to use (and abuse) your platform. That’s what social media giants Facebook, Twitter and Google are discovering as yet another attempt to manipulate users has been revealed.

According to recent reports, Twitter said it will no longer accept advertising from from “state-controlled news media entities” after it was discovered that China was attempting to use Twitter and Facebook to engage in orchestrated misinformation around the ongoing protests in Hong Kong. This comes on the heels of repeated reports of Russian use of social media to influence political campaigns and elections in the USA and elsewhere.

The question now is whether these huge tech companies can put the genie back in the bottle. Or will regulation, new AI technology, or some other solution have to appear before we can feel confident that freedom and democracy are safe from the actions of nefarious state actors?

November 28, 2018

Are you a soldier or a scout?

Unconscious bias infects our every thought and decision. It is a given, and most of the time we learn to live with our own (and with others’) biases. However, as media content producers we should learn a few best practices to minimize the effect of our personal biases if we want to rise above petty partisanship and minimize the reproach of our readers/listeners/viewers. As the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics says, “Seek the Truth and Report it.”

The YouTube video below by Julia Galef explains how we approach new information from different perspectives when we’re acting as a soldier or a scout. The “soldier” is seeking to win the battle, while the “scout” is simply trying to understand the context and the facts on the ground.

This concept also applies to the role of media consumer. When you’re consuming new information try to step outside of your team/group identity before you rush to judgement. Try to adopt a scout mindset, especially when confronted with information that counters your existing values and opinions. If we can all take a small step in that direction we’ll find that truth is much more likely to begin to chip away at our unconscious biases.