research – Page 3 – Media Matters

March 18, 2010

Reality TV Heroes and Villains

The MCCNM faculty have been attending and presenting at an academic conference each year for the past several years. The conference is an annual meeting of the Society for the Interdisciplinary Study of Social Imagery, or SISSI for short. Each year the conference organizers select a theme, and people from across the country and around the world travel to Colorado to present and discuss topics related to the theme. This year the theme was the Image of the Hero in Society, and as a department we decided to write papers about the image of the hero in the mass media. The title of my presentation, Reality TV Pseudo-Heroes and Villains: Moral Compromise and the Quest for Infamy, is a play on the name of the 20th season of the reality TV show Survivor: Heroes and Villains. The Cliff Notes version of my presentation is as follows.

Reality TV is a trends that is not going away. According to Nielsen, four of the top five regularly scheduled TV programs in 2009 were reality TV shows and according to TV Guide, the trend is continuing in 2010.
America’s obsession with reality TV programming has spawned a fascination with reality TV as a path to fame and fortune, at any cost. Problems arise when we, as a society, fail to differentiate between heroism and celebrity. We diminish the value of heroic acts and we place celebrity on a pedestal where it becomes the ultimate goal but has no correlation to achievement. Many years before reality TV burst on the scene, Daniel Boorstin understood the problem. He wrote, “…the electronic hero is famous simply for appearing on or in the media, not for any intrinsic qualities.”
Recent events in the news suggest that the lure of instant celebrity offered by reality TV leads to some pretty despicable behavior. For example, the Heenes (parents of Balloon Boy) and the Salahis (Whitehouse party crashers).
Those who become reality TV “stars” demonstrate similar failure to possess anything remotely resembling heroic character. Take Jon Gosselin, Octomom Nadya Suleman, disgraced former Illinois governor Rod Blogojevich (on this season’s Celebrity Apprentice), and the entire cast of Jersey Shore. Seriously, take them, take them all…please!

In the presentation I spoke of research that a colleague and I had conducted. We surveyed approximately 530 students from five colleges and universities in the US and Canada We found that the number one reason for college students’ choosing to watch reality TV is perceived “personal identification with real characters”…the sense that the people on the small screen were just like them. From there it becomes pretty easy to image yourself in their shoes, with all the fame and fortune that accompanies the role. Pretty soon you’re trying out for American Idol or thinking about how great it would be if you could be a contestant on the next installment of Real World.

In conclusion, the very same qualities that help us identify with reality TV stars is what makes them so appealing to us. The fact that we can see ourselves in their shoes, if only for that one lucky break, is what keeps us coming back for more. The capitalist myth that anyone can be successful, famous, and wealthy has run its course and is now made evident by celebrity heroes who, through luck and discovery (being in the right place at the right time) have made it to the big time. Reality TV stars are precisely appealing because we all believe that we could be just as famous/rich/happy/etc. as that person on the screen because they really are no different than us. Think about it…who doesn’t know somebody, who knows somebody, who tried out for American Idol. Unlike the Hollywood stars of yesteryear, today’s reality TV stars did not fall to earth from some celestial orbit…they came from just down the street.

February 10, 2010

Doritos Ads Win Viewer and Recall Metrics

If you watched the Superbowl last weekend you probably saw a few ads for Doritos. According to Nielsen, the most watched TV ad of all time, (with 116.2 million viewers), featured a Samurai attack with a Dorito chip. Doritos ads also took the top three slots for most-recalled spots and four spots in the top-ten most-liked category.

What you may also have heard is that the Doritos ads were consumer-generated spots. CGM (Consumer Generated Media) has been generating buzz for several years…all the while the Media Emperor’s cloths have begun to look a little thread-bare. The idea behind CGM is that individual consumers often possess great talent and expertise, and if you can just give them an opening, they may deliver the goods. Now, mind you, TV spot production is a big-budget undertaking requiring exceptional creative and technical expertise and should not be attempted by amateurs. In the case of the Doritos ads, the ideas, not the execution, were consumer-generated.

But according to MIT’s Ad Lab blog, the proverbial “average Joe” behind the winning spots is not as average as we might first believe. According to Ad Lab, this year’s winners, and winners from previous years, have come from the ranks of creative professions very near to the TV advertising business. Some of them have been film makers, producers, musicians, and even creative directors. For now, at least, the storybook ending where the little guy finally bests the Madison Avenue advertising machine remains, well, a fairytale.

January 16, 2010

Want to Work in the Media?

A new study released this week by CareerCast.com, and reported in the WSJ, evaluates 200 professions to determine the best and worst according to five criteria: environment, income, employment outlook, physical demands and stress. Of course these are somewhat subjective criteria and your experience may be quite different from those reported by CareerCast.

So just how did the media-related professions stack up against the competition? Well, let’s look first at the very best and very worst jobs out there. At the top of the list are three math-related professions: mathematician (#1), actuary (#2), and statistician (#3…Audience Research students, please note this one!). The worst? Lumberjack (#200), dairy farmer (#199), and taxi driver (#198).

A quick scan for media jobs yields a wide range on the scale of 1-200. Here they are from best to worst.

#19 Motion Picture Editor
#23 Web Developer
#31 Publication Editor
#44 Market Research Analyst
#75 Newscaster
#79 Advertising Account Executive
#108 DJ
#112 Public Relations Executive
#140 Reporter (newspaper), Janitor is #141
#167 Photojournalist

Data used to determine the ranking came from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Census Bureau, as well as other sources.

December 15, 2009

Social Networking Contest Contains Lessons for News Media

Last week the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), the folks responsible for bringing us the Internet, sponsored a contest that may result in some interesting data about how we use social media to gather and disseminate information. The goal of the contest was to provide the location (longitude and latitude) of 10 red, eight-foot-wide weather balloons that had been placed at various locations within the continental US. It took the team from MIT just 9 hours to win the contest, and the $40K prize, using a diverse strategy combining social media collaboration with reward programs. But some of the teams also took a walk on the dark side when they employed deception intended to sidetrack competing teams.

So, what does this have to do with media and journalism? Think of every breaking news story as a contest. The first journalistic team to crack the story and file the report is rewarded with ratings/readership/reputation, etc., all of which translates into monetary rewards for the winning team. How does NBC, CNN, the BBC, or People Magazine “scoop” the competition when they’re working a breaking story? They may try to buy an “exclusive” interview with a key player. When President Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas, TX, Dan Rather, a reporter for CBS, became aware of Zapruder’s 8mm film of the assassination. He asked for permission from the top CBS brass to buy the film for $10,ooo, but that turned out to be too little, too late. Zapruder had already sold the film and rights to Life magazine for $150,000! And if you think that’s a lot of money, the 6-foot long strip of celluloid with 494 frames, lasting 26 seconds, was later purchased by the US government for $16 million!

Today, news organizations may use social media networking to mobilize reporters and stringers who work for the news organization and perhaps even try to recruit “citizen journalists” who may have inside information. Twitter and other social media tools can be used to disseminate information and to recruit collaborators.

The DARPA contest may actually provide some insight into the process of collaboration and even intentional deception using social media. Hopefully the news media are above floating fake balloons to try to fool the competition. But sadly, whenever money is at stake there are people willing to bend the rules.

Read more, or listen to the story, at the NPR website.

October 15, 2009

Accuracy of News Media

One of the most sacred tenets of journalism is under fire. Recent surveys point to disturbing trends with regard to perceived accuracy and demand for accuracy from our news media.

According to recent findings by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, the public’s assessment of the accuracy of news is at its lowest level in more than two decades. Less than 30% of Americans surveyed believe that news organizations generally get the facts straight, while 63% say that news stories are often inaccurate. That is a dramatic reversal from 1985 when 55% said news stories were accurate while 34% said they were inaccurate.

What may be more disturbing is the view, held by some, that consumers of web news prefer speed over accuracy. According to consultants to The Columbus Dispatch, readers prefer getting the information sooner rather than later, even if it means that there is a greater chance that the information is inaccurate. These ideas–that readers want to be “part of the reporting process” and “over time, the truth will come out”–are at odd with one of the sacred cows of journalism. The mantra has been repeated over and over…you’ve got to get it fast, but you’ve got to get it right. Does that mean that you wait to publish until you’re 99.9% sure of the accuracy of your story? That may depend on whether you want to be known for scoops or for consistently reliable information. If you’re an old-school journalist it may be that your commitment to accuracy is what sets you apart from the bloggers, citizen journalists, and advocates who are willing to take more risks.

March 30, 2009

Behavioral Targeting of Gen Y

computer Behavioral targeting (BT) is a strategy that attempts to deliver relevant ads to internet users based on their surfing behavior. The good news for advertisers is that they can target niche audiences with a level of precision only dreamed about in years past. The good news for consumers, if there is good news, is that you should be seeing ads that are relevant to your lifestyle and preferences…and not a lot of ads that are targeting someone else. The idea is brilliant, but the practice does not appear to be living up to expectations for members of Gen Y. New research shows that young consumers notice the ads, but few find them relevant. As a result, about 36% never click on ads, and the remaining 74% click infrequently. If you’re an advertiser running an interactive (read “online”) advertising campaign, those kinds of numbers are very discouraging. But it is also possible that the survey responses don’t capture the whole truth. I suspect that most survey respondents are reluctant to admit that they sometimes respond to online ads. And of course not all online advertising requires a click…some of it is simply designed to create and impression without a call to action.

This is a privacy issue, and it involves children, so naturally the government is getting involved. The FTC (Federal Trade Commission) is considering recommendation of voluntary industry guidelines that would limit data collection from those under 18 for the purpose of BT.

Some researchers have suggested that Gen Y actually prefers BT and may want to send explicit messages to marketers about what kinds of products and services they would welcome. That doesn’t sound like my idea of a good time…but then I’m just a wee bit older than this demographic. What do you think? Would you welcome advertising messages that were more focused and relevant to your personal interests, or do you just want them all to go away?

November 14, 2008

Sex on TV Promotes Teen Pregancy

According to a recent study published in Pediatrics, teens who watch more explicit sexual content on TV are twice as likely to become pregnant or father a child before they reach age 20.This is the first time that a study has actually shown a relationship between exposure to explicit content on TV and pregnancy. This is alarming when you consider that the US has double the teen pregnancy rate of other developing countries. It is particularly troubling now as the country has seen its first increase in teen pregnancy in 14 years.

It’s not just that kids are watching sexually-charged content on TV, but also that the sexual content fails to portray sex in a realistic way. According to one of the researchers, “most TV shows portray sex as having few life-altering implications, such as pregnancy or sexually transmitted diseases” (quoted in USA Today). And while there are many variables that affect a teen’s decision to become sexually active, the researchers indicated that, “TV-watching was strongly connected with teen pregnancy even when other factors were considered, including grades, family structure and parents’ education level.”

And what were the TV programs that contained sexually-explicit content? Several mentioned included; Sex and the City, That ’70s Show, and Friends.

If this study is replicated and the finding supported, what should be our response as concerned citizens and consumers of media?

Hockey Mom Scores Big on TV

Everyone expected Obama’s acceptance speech last Thursday night to garner impressive ratings…and it did. With 38.4 million viewers, Obama’s speech was the most-watched convention speech ever, according to estimates from Nielsen Media Research. To put it in perspective, 4 million more viewers watched Obama’s speech than watched the Olympic opening ceremonies or the American Idol final.

But the real surprise of the convention season was the TV audience for the Republican party’s VP, Sarah Palin. Palin’s speech on Wednesday night drew 37.2 million viewers, just 1.1 million viewers fewer than Obama’s and 13.2 million more than tuned in for Biden’s speech. According to Nielsen, these numbers are even more impressive because Palin’s speech was carried by only six networks compared with ten for Obama’s.

There are several reasons that may explain Palin’s huge ratings…the fact that she was virtually unknown until a few days before the convention, the disclosure of her daughter’s pregnancy, and the high stakes involved in this November’s election. Palin’s acceptance speech did not pull any punches as she took shots at both Obama and the media.

Speaking of the media, a fair number of Republican Convention speakers made a point to criticize the media coverage of the campaign, and more specifically, media criticism of the choice of Palin for VP. Some of the sharpest criticism of Palin and her family has been at the hands of bloggers and others outside of the media mainstream. Republicans have fired back criticizing the “elite” or “liberal” media for unfair and even “sexist” attacks on Palin by questioning her ability to be a successful woman/mother while holding an office “one heartbeat away from the presidency.” The next two months should prove to be interesting as the candidates, and the media, respond to the intense scrutiny of the spotlight.

March 30, 2008

Data Driven Decision Making

The best arguments appeal to both reason and emotion. But if you have to choose one over the other, data-supported arguments that appeal to logic and reason are usually preferable. And while the idea of math is frightening to many mass communication students, the preferred method of creating and sustaining a rational argument involves the use of statistical analysis. So whether you’re taking my Audience Research class, or Marketing Research, or you’re thinking about signing up for Sport Writing and Statistics class offered this fall…sooner or later you’ll be face to face with stats. But that doesn’t have to be a bad thing. Thinking and reasoning with numbers can be an extremely valuable skill set to bring to a potential employer, and once you get over the initial “fear of math” you may even find that you like it.

All of us use statistical reasoning on a regular basis…whether we acknowledge it or not. We talk about averages, percentages and even probabilities. Given a sequence of numbers we can spot a trend and most of us know about the basic concepts of central tendencies and variance…even if we don’t know the lingo. If you are going to be a news reporter or editor you’ll need to know how to write about events using statistical concepts that your audience will understand. Simple stats turn confusing sets of numbers into understandable concepts. For example, sports statistics such as FG% and RBIs reduce a pile of data into simple numbers that are easier to understand and compare. According to stats.com, Davidson’s Stephen Curry ended the season with 25 points against Kansas for a season average of 25.9 PPG and a 3P% (three-point-shot percentage) of 44.8%. There’s even an online stats resources that uses sports and exercise science examples to teach statistical concepts.

On 60 Minutes this evening, Morley Safer filed a report about Bill James, a statistician for the World Champion Boston Red Sox. The segment illustrated the importance of statistical analysis when making critical decisions. So whether you’re a media content creator or consumer, a sports fan or reporter, a basic understanding of stats will serve you well in the long run…and in the short term it may even increase your GPA.

March 17, 2008

Manipulating Magazine Metrics

The average American household spends about $10 per month on magazine subscriptions. The average number of subscriptions per household is 6 magazines, and the average subscriber spends about 45 minutes with each magazine. (I know that’s a lot of averages…but hang with me.) On average, monthly magazines have a longer shelf-life than weeklies, and both stay around the house longer than daily publications, e.g., a daily newspaper. My personal experience seems to support these data…we subscribe to 5 or 6 magazines and I pick up a newsstand copy now and then. From time to time I also pick up and read magazines in public places–e.g. my dentist’s office. From the look of some of them they have been read by quite a few equally bored patients.

Most magazines are about 50% editorial content and 50% advertisements. And like nearly all mass media, magazines live or die on advertising revenue. So it should be no surprise that publishers want to know who’s reading and to what extent the magazine’s ads are engaging the reader. Just recently the Magazine Publishers of America (MPA) announced that they want to measure their audience by total readers, not just paid circulation. According to the MPA, magazines are “passed along” to other readers and these readers should count. Translation: advertisers should be paying for the privilege of reaching all the readers. According to their press release, the MPA also wants to provide more detail about issue-by-issue demographic data, advertisement engagement data, and,”consumer action as a result of the ad.”

But convincing advertisers that print magazines are such a good deal that they ought to be willing to pay for the secondary audience may be a tough sell. One thing is clear–print publications are trying to hold onto their audiences and prove their relevancy in a time of media upheaval. These latest measures may signal a desperate attempt to slow the hemorrhaging.