New editors decide what to broadcast on television and what to print in newspapers. What factors do you think influence these decisions? Do we become used to bad news? Would it be better if more good news was reported? Discuss.
News editors enjoy absolute authority over what to include, or exclude from reporting: this mirrors several influencing aspects. However, are people becoming habitual of reports about fateful events, and will reports about optimistic happenings help, is a matter worthy of deep analysis.
The elements that play a
larger role in news selection process include deciding about the relevance of
events and happenings to be reported. Today, news
editors always select the information, which can be sensationalized, and attract more and more readers and viewers. The TRP ratings and readership are
on top priority for the most, and they always wish to
ensure that their visibility is exceptionally bolstered.
The inclination of mass media
agencies has engendered a trend of gloomy reporting. Consequently, umpteen sections feel that they have developed an instaiable appetite for receiving
unpleasant news from all walks of life. audience automatically gets inclined to
receiving those snippets and reports about distressing incidents.
Having said that, some commentators feel that even after the growing affliation to reporting distressing happenings, public hardly seem to have developed a penchant to disturbing events. They have a good appetite for all kinds of reports, and as can be seen from the reviews registered on prominent media outlets such as CNN.
In conclusion, I feel, although majority of news being reported are distressing and some people would
like to get a good input of pleasant happenings, news must be presented as it
is and whether events in question are pleasant or distressing.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.