Emergent Journalism

Reports from the front line of journalism instruction

Leave a comment

Lazy news gathering through social media unhealthy for democracy

I posed a series of questions to one of my classes this week that brought out an interesting pattern of results.

I first asked them to report about their time spent on consumption of general news, instructing them to exclude time spent on things such as sports and entertainment news. The three options were: “spend a lot of time with general news” (defined as 30-plus minutes most days); “spend some time with it” (between 10 and 30 minutes most days); and “spend little or no time with it” (less than 10 minutes a day). They were about evenly split between “some” and “little to none.” Not a single student said they spend “a lot of time” with general news.

In the next class session, I asked them to agree or disagree with each of the following statements: “Living in a democracy is important to me” and “Self-governance (democracy) requires public awareness about the government.” Not surprisingly, every member of the class agreed with both statements.

Then we held a discussion about the discrepancy between their answers to the question about the importance of public awareness, and their own self-disclosed profile as a group that overall pays scant attention to general news. Pointing out the discrepancy seemed to make them uncomfortable, and many who offered an explanation fell back on lack of time as a rationale. (To which my response was: we all have busy lives, yet we all find time for the things that are important to us.)

The discrepancy gave me an idea for an analogy, which I also presented, as follows: This pattern of answers is like the person who says they want to be healthy and fit, yet won’t make the time and effort to eat healthy and exercise. Can people stay healthy if they can’t be bothered to engage in healthy habits? The obvious answer is “no.” Extending this as a teaching point, I asked whether a democracy could be healthy if half of the people within it pay little or no attention to the information they need to effectively govern themselves. *Crickets* as a response.

Engaging in this activity with the students, and especially the exercise analogy I came up with, helped me think about three other pieces of news this week from a different angle. Earlier in the week I had read both Charlie Warzel’s Buzzfeed piece about how easy it has become to manipulate reality (and the implications for that) and Wired magazine’s article about how Facebook got “gamed” in ways that manipulated campaign information during 2016. And just hours after the class discussion came news of the indictments from Special Counsel Robert Mueller illustrating just how manipulative Russian operatives actually had been during the 2016 campaign.

All of this prompted me to think that an obvious, if maybe unrealistic, solution to the problem of public opinion manipulation that threatens to damage democracy is to stop getting public affairs news from social media platforms and instead actually seek it out from organizations that Washington Post columnist Margaret Sullivan has referred to as “the reality-based press.” By all means keep your Facebook and Instagram accounts to post personal news and photos about vacations, family events, personal accomplishments, etc. But don’t post, or consume, news about politics, disasters, etc.

I realize it is unrealistic to think that this behavioral change will happen in a widespread way. Getting news from social media has become the default approach because it’s easier to let news find us than it is to go seek it.

I suggest it nonetheless because current patterns of news behavior are what made Facebook ill-equipped to stop Russian operatives from using it to flood the zone with campaign propaganda, as Nicholas Thompson and Fred Vogelstein describe in Wired. More frightening, it could allow the manufactured reality scenarios like those described by Aviv Ovadya in Warzel’s article to develop, too.

But in “outsourcing” our news-seeking work to our social media feeds, aren’t we much like my students who say they are “too busy” to pay attention to news at all? We just can’t be bothered to subscribe to local newspapers and other high-quality (i.e. “reality-based press”) outlets and get our news from them. It’s so much easier to let the Facebook tide of links flow over us, fake news and filter bubbles be damned.

Wouldn’t society be better off if more people made the effort to ensure that the information they are consuming is valid, verified, reliable and accurate? Getting it from trustworthy news organizations is perhaps the best way to do that, which is what I am suggesting here. (As an aside, I don’t for one second believe that Facebook’s effort to have users rate trustworthiness of news organization shared in feeds will work. It’s just another algorithm to be gamed.)

This isn’t a call to turn the clock back 50 years to Walter Cronkite being the nearly sole arbiter of “that’s the way it is.” But if effective self-governance does rely on the public having a shared set of verified facts about public policy and the activities of our public officials, then surely making the effort to get that information from the reality-based press instead of something shared on Facebook that may have reached a news feed courtesy of a Russian bot becomes a necessary first step.

People who want to stay healthy eat right and exercise. For democracy to stay healthy, we need more – and ideally all –  citizens to engage in news-gathering practices that keep accurate, reliable, verifiable information as the basis of our political decision-making. For as long as we keep taking the lazy way out of turning to Facebook for our news, that’s not going to happen.

Cross posted to my Medium account



Leave a comment

Going mobile

The following line actually was published in an article in The Guardian a couple of weeks ago, in coverage about Trinity Mirror pulling the plug on UsVsTh3m and the implications for the just-introduced Facebook Instant Articles. Facebook’s plans, along with experiments such as UsVsTh3m, according to the Guardian:

crystallise what has been happening since the invention of the iPhone, and that is a move towards producing quickly accessible material which can be viewed through a very small, responsive screen.

If there is an imperative for journalists, journalism educators and anyone else with a stake in the field to keep in mind, it’s that. Quickly accessible. Small format. Responsive.

The Guardian’s concise summary of the state of the art resonates nicely with the most recent State of the News Media report,whose headline was that most news these days is being consumed via mobile devices.

It wasn’t that long ago journalists, and journalism educators, were working to articulate what it meant to be “digital first.” But that idea is now passe. What’s necessary is to be mobile first.

Leave a comment

Messaging apps, news distribution and paths of least resistance

In graduate school  30 years ago I recall reading an intriguing little book called The Path of Least Resistance. It was a personal productivity, self-help offering along the same lines as Steven Covey’s The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People. And it was all about, as the title states, finding the most friction-free way to accomplish creative results.

It strikes me that one of the hurdles evolving journalism faces is finding the least-resistant paths to new modes of delivery, as the business models of the old ways continue to crumble.

A new feature from the instant messaging app Snapchat, which debuted this week in partnership with several well-known news organizations, may be an example of one of those low-resistance paths. The Discover feature was released by Snapchat on Tuesday and has already been gaining a lot of attention.

An excellent review of what it could mean for news by Joshua Benton at Nieman Lab focuses on the least-resistance concept in a couple of different ways. As Benton notes, Discover

  • Puts news where the audience already is — a reference to the 100 million users Snapchat has, many of them young people who are still developing their news consumption habits; and.
  • Is completely native to mobile, not (quoting from Benton) “newspaper stories or TV pieces stuffed awkwardly into new containers.”

One of Benton’s key insights is that “the share of consumers that regularly, purposefully seeks out news for news’ sake is relatively small … a large portion of the audience has always encountered news through a mix of adjacencies, social vectors, habits, and accidents.” That’s true not just in the present age, but historically as well. News dissemination has always benefited from word of mouth (“social vectors”). Reading the newspaper or watching nightly TV news was very habitual, but a habit that younger generations just never developed.

So in the information-overload world where the mobile device becomes both access point and filter, as Benton continues, “it makes sense that news will have to be integrated into how people are already interacting with the broader universe of information.” He also notes that in a column a few weeks ago he wondered aloud “What will be the laid-back, low-effort experience that replaces TV news?”and speculates that Discover may be an example of one.

In other words, what path(s) of least resistance are going to emerge as news and journalism continue to evolve? We may have seen the initial blazes along the trail for one such path this week with Snapchat’s Discover release.





Leave a comment

ONA Envy

One of the fundamental rules of the Carnival of Journalism group-blogging exercise founded by David Cohn is “no apologies” for anything when blogging.

In that spirit I won’t apologize, or offer excuses, but I hope Dave will allow me to at least feel a little guilty for going three weeks between posts.


One of these years I need to make it to the annual Online News Association conference. A sizable number of good friends were there — judging by their tweets — and I’m sure it would have been extremely interesting and valuable. (Though I certainly would not have wanted to endure what many conference-goers did with all of the airport hassles in Chicago.)

Fortunately, as with many conferences these days, so much coverage is posted online, both in real time through social media and after the fact, that it’s possible to get a good sense of what I missed. An especially valuable resource in this regard is the ONA Student Newsroom, where student journalists from various universities working with professionals and educators as mentors cover the conference with text, images, video, and other tools.

I haven’t pored through all of the available coverage, but one of the key sessions seems to have been Amy Webb’s on tech trends. Looking through the list of bullet points, there are a few things I recognize from Webb’s presentation at the 2014 JI Conference in Maryland last April. But she has a reputation for not giving the same presentation twice — probably because she knows how much of an overlap there is between these conferences that draw similar audiences — so I am looking forward to going through her slides for some insights.

And the rest of the stories by the student newsroom — there appear to be at least 75 of them on a WordPress powered site — should keep me busy reading for a while, too.