SMITH: Infotainment: Worrying fusion of news, entertainment
Recently, in my "News, Entertainment and Politics" class, we discussed the convergence of entertainment and news over time. It made me realize just how virtually inseparable the two are. But has this always been the case?
The answer is complicated. But the value of incorporating entertainment into news has definitely become more prominent over the course of the evolution of television, especially through the establishment of network news.
20 years ago, there were only three main broadcast news networks: ABC, CBS and NBC. When there were just these three networks, there was more of a focus on presenting "hard news," or news more focused on informing rather than entertaining, especially regarding subjects such as politics.
These news networks presented the news the way they did due to requirements dictated by Congress and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) over keeping the public informed. They also continued presenting hard news because they ran entertainment programs that supplemented the financial loss of the news.
As time passed, regulations changed and more competition arose for channel viewing. The increased competition drove the demand for news to be more profitable, which placed more of an emphasis on primetime entertainment programming to drive up viewership.
The dominance of primetime entertainment ultimately drove news to change and evolve. An example of this is the creation of Don Hewitt's "60 Minutes." This program was created to emphasize the role of journalists in investigating controversial issues or interviewing prominent people.
As news evolved over time to adapt to the rising changes in the media landscape, one of the techniques that news channels used to make their viewing programs more accessible was incorporating the "Now … This" method of presenting news. This technique essentially means that news is presented in fragmented parts, with newscasters moving from story to story often by saying the phrase, "Now … This" and changing the subject.
The problem with the "Now … This" technique is that, due to its nature, it provides a summary of news events and could leave out important context and details. I think the shifting of coverage from Russia and Ukraine's conflict to Israel and Palestine is a good example of this because important updates in the Russian-Ukrainian conflict are overshadowed by the new conflict of interest in the media.
Moreover, the "Now … This" technique can be presented in a way where the emotional appeal of news is more about putting on a performance rather than presenting the gravity of a story, which can lead to misinformation.
Social media is another great example that emulates the "Now … This" formula, as a lot of news on social media is super condensed information contained in a single post, leaving out certain details of a story. This is alarming because, in 2021, approximately 48 percent of adults in the U.S. claimed to get their news from social media sometimes and even often.
Considering the adaption of news to the modern media audience, the entertainment factor in the news has led to a shift from an authoritative coverage style to a more subjective one from before and after the 2000s, respectively. This was due to news transitioning from being more direct in coverage to focusing more on expressing opinions, conducting interviews and more.
I cannot think of how often I have turned on the news to watch out of curiosity, whether CNN or Fox News, just to see a reporter ramble on about an issue without providing actual substance or news. Even if news was provided, it was often sensationalized and layered in subjectivity. The news was devoid of important context and was presented through a biased lens in a way where the watcher has the illusion of being informed.
I have also noticed that news stories are stretched thin without significant news. A prominent example that I have experienced is watching CNN's coverage of former President Donald J. Trump's hush-money trial.
A good portion of the time leading up to and throughout the trial, CNN would just negatively portray Trump's character and go on about him being a bad human being as if there were no significant updates on the trial.
With news and entertainment blending into a sort of infotainment, it is now more crucial than ever to stem the spread of misinformation. To stay informed, it is important to get news from reputable sites and to cross-check news stories across multiple sources to prove their validity.
David Smith is a senior in the School of Arts and Sciences majoring in journalism and media studies and minoring in psychology. Smith's column, "David's Diary," runs on alternate Thursdays.
Columns, cartoons, letters and commentaries do not necessarily reflect the views of the Targum Publishing Company or its staff.
YOUR VOICE | The Daily Targum welcomes submissions from all readers. Letters to the editor must be between 350 and 600 words. Commentaries must be between 600 and 900 words. All authors must include their name, phone number, class year and college affiliation or department to be considered for publication. Please submit via email to oped@dailytargum.com and eic@dailytargum.com to be considered for publication.
