Credibility of Media - Essay Example

? 642079 Outline Media Credibility I. Introduction A. Is media becoming less and less credible? B. Some current developments in media Survey results at Pew Research Center C. Objectives of paper II. Discussions A. What is media and what does it mean to most people? 1. The concept of media 2. Evolution of media 3. Traditional media 4. The new media B. What is credibility? 1. Dimensions of credibility C. The view from the audience; what has happened to media 1. The credible side a. Literature on increased media credibility b. How traditional media derived its credibility 2. The less credible side a. Literature on declining media credibility b. Reports of media credibility decline i. Gallup poll results ii. New York Times study D. Summary of studies 1. Causes of decline a. Actions that contributed to decline b. The economic crisis of 2007 c. Adversary journalism d. Emergence of the new media e. Characteristics of new media E. The writer’s stand on media credibility F. The need for media credibility 1. Media as gatekeeper of information 2. The importance of accuracy of information III. Conclusion A. The importance of media credibility B. Summary findings on declining media credibility C. The writer’s stand D. Some recommendations 1. Addressing the decline a. Putting public interest at heart b. Professionalism Media Credibility Introduction Is media becoming less and less credible? The question presupposes that media, taken in its singular collective form to include all types of information exchange or vehicles known and available to man, has had its presumed level of credibility. Media credibility is the condition of believability or acceptance of its truthfulness or untruthfulness from the point of view of its audience (Starcks and Salwen, 2009), and may be expressed as a level or percentage of acceptance as in number of respondents answering in the affirmative or negative. For purposes of this paper and to enable an adventure into the pros and cons of the thesis statement, media shall be deemed to enjoy some reasonable acceptance by its publics, given that it has enjoyed public viewing since time unknown. Hence, the question: Is media becoming less and less credible? Recently, CBS News released the results of a survey by Pew Research Center for the People and the Press of people’s perception of media taken sometime in 2009 (CBSNews, 2009). The survey indicated that nearly two-thirds of Americans think that the news stories that they read, hear and watch are frequently inaccurate (CBSNews, 2009). The Center described these results as the highest level of skepticism ever recorded since 1985 when the first study was conducted. Other studies such as this would be presented in this paper to provide a wide-angle picture of the issue of credibility in media. It is the purpose of this paper to take this closer look at media in its most common forms and analyse critically the trend it is taking insofar as its acceptability to the public is concerned. The paper shall present secondary information to support its thesis regarding this media direction and provide some observations and conclusions that may add insight and value the literature available on the matter. Media Credibility What is media and what does it mean to most people? The concept of media traces back to the times old as far back as Aristotle. History is abundant in treatment of the development of media as it captures the essence of life in what is to be known as civilization. Man always looked for vehicles that would translate his ideas and values. In the early times, these representations could be found in the primitive expressions etched in stones and later, as the medium developed, in the traditional media. The theories varied but generally focused on source, message and audience type, and the issue has been the audience’s trust as a result of the audience’s knowing what is true (Stacks and Salwen, 2009). Media, then, according to Mayo and Nohria (2005), pertained largely to its use mostly by advertisers as communication vehicles for their advertisements. Today, when people say media, they usually mean mass media or traditional media that is composed of television, radio and print journalism, and more recently, the Internet, becoming accepted as the New Media (Cardwell, 2000). Straubhaar et al (2009) described old media as comprising of radio, television, newspapers and film. Today, the new media has virtually taken over the lines and platforms of these old media as interactive media technology was introduced. Interactive, in this sense, is used to describe the two-way characteristics of new media as compared to the one-way mode of the old. As might have been known, Internet users have the privilege to post and to post back information as they see fit, a privilege that was not available in print nor in television. Media credibility, while resting in the audience, is largely a matter of its source and its content. Stacks and Salwen (2009) believe that the credibility of an information may be dominantly influenced by the credibility of its writer or speaker and partially by what the audience thinks of its source. Elements of Credibility Browning et al (2008) suggests four elements that may affect media’s credibility: source, message, media and audience. Earlier empirical studies on media credibility had been done largely for the benefit of advertisers, according to Stacks and Salwen (2009). These researches sought to identify the mass media which were “trusted” most for information and news. The reason for this search for trustworthiness is obvious: media outlets that are labeled as trustworthy are those which would command a high degree of patronage. It is to be noted that ever since, such media sources had been enjoying some levels of credibility enough to influence attitudes. Other early researches on media credibility focused on the dimensions of confidence, credibility, believability and accuracy, as cited by Arvidson in Petterssen (1984). Confidence and believability are characteristics that would belong to the audience while credibility and accuracy would pertain to the mass media. Arvidson in Petterson (1984) further notes that the four dimensions are considered principal elements of persuasion and that sources known to possess high credibility would be seen to be more effective persuaders. Petterssen (1984) supports the view that the perception of credibility emanates from the source, the message itself, the medium and its representation. In terms of credibility attributed to media, Sparks (2010) contends that as a source, the chief components of media credibility are expertise and trustworthiness, with expertise having to do with the extent people perceive the source as expert on the topic, and trustworthiness as the extent to which people find the source as reliable or truthful. The View from the Audience Part of the discussions on media credibility has been derived from published materials devoted to improving media credibility. However, literature is scant and limited on the nature of the secondary inquiry on the subject of “increasing media credibility.” Those available were not directly patronizing of the credibility of media but simply aimed to give some credit for media’s role. Pratte (1995) recalls that television and other traditional media had played decisive roles in revolutionizing rising consumer expectations. He cited how these media had strongly influenced the culture of consumption and created and increased consumer demands for services and products. In fact, in a news dispatch sometime in 2009, Associated Press (2009) cited the gains of media before 1985: back then, the AP reports, “55% of poll respondents believed that newspapers and broadcasters generally got things right.” Or was it possible that no one was focusing on what media was doing right but the other way around? Unfortunately, there is wider academic treatment from the literature of the lessening of credibility than increasing credibility. Much of the literature appearing in established information bases talked more of media’s receding credibility than increasing credibility (Starcks and Salwen, 2009; Mayo and Nohria, 2005: Cardwell, 2000; Petterssen, 1984; Straubhaar et al, 2009; Dillard and Pfau, 2002; Browning et al, 2008) giving an indication of a pattern or trend, unless properly redirected or qualified. Insight magazine, through Timothy Maier, wrote in 2004: A recent Gallup poll says Americans rate the trustworthiness of journalists at about the level of politicians and as only slightly more credible than used-car salesmen. The poll suggests that only 21% of Americans believe journalists have high ethical standards, ranking them below auto mechanics but tied with members of Congress (WorldNetDaily, 2004). Healy (2005) of the New York Times was more succinct in his comments after receiving another poll report in 2003 that found “66% of Americans see news reports as slanted, compared with 53% in 1985. Even more stunning to analysts were the findings that 32% judged news organizations as immoral, up from 13% in 1985.” Healy (2005) said that the findings indicate that American confidence in the news media is at an all-time low. Why Media Is Losing Credibility Aggarwal (1989 p 1), as early as 1989, has commented in his book Media Credibility that journalists are losing their credibility very fast, and observed that this was a new phenomenon at that time and serving warning at the same time that it was the greatest threat to the freedom of the press. There seemed to have been established some reasons for this state of affairs concerning media. Some businessmen were talking about how newsmen could be bought, how some editors and news writers could lobby for certain industries and receive compensation for doing so by being part of their payroll (Aggarwal, 1989). Some news items were passed off as news items when in fact they were not. “Praise” was becoming an alternative to “press,” so Aggarwal (1989) seemed to be saying. He mentioned about gifts given to journalists on occasions, with gifts ranging from pants to fountain pens to calculators to envelops, not to mention the wining and dining of media men just to get them to write favorably about a certain product or service (Aggarwal, 1989). He even cited the practice of some journalists of giving undue publicity to companies in exchange for shares and debentures of the firm. Following the economic crisis of 2007, the number of newspapers and other publications dwindled as revenues and stocks collapsed (Straubhaar et al, 2009). Confounding this was the convergence point towards the transformation of conventional media into digital media, with the advent of the Internet as the new information gateway. The new media has now replaced the television as the number one information source, a role that was seen as an evolution resulting from society undergoing its transition from agriculture to industrial to informational (Straubhaar et al, 2009). OECD (2010), however, admits that even before the changeover to digital and the Internet, the issue of credibility has already actually been at stake. The credibility issues have been largely tied around the high concentration of media ownership, the ever increasing usage of space in favor of advertising, the close relationships between and among journalists and the persons they cover, the increasing influence of public relations agencies, the continuing reduction in editorial quality, among other issues (OECD, 2010). Other reasons cited for this diminishing credibility of old or traditional media include the ease by which access and diffusion are made in the digital medium as compared with the traditional media and the additional work involved in catering to both online and offline media which may affect the journalist work load and his work quality (OECD, 2010). Some observers even commented that with the lessening presence and effectiveness of traditional media, there is no longer a functioning business model on journalism (OECD, 2010). The Internet has thus effectively put an end to news monopolies of the old and has made traditional paper-based information media as old fashioned and obsolete. There are almost no barriers to publishing in the alternative medium found, which of course consequently subjects the same media to the issue of credibility. However, since the new media is two-way, a dynamic exchange can filter the information and could even allow the user to decide how to deal with the information in the way that will be suitable to him. However, also basing on Pratte’s analysis (1995), television and other media had badly distorted the very process of public information, through its investigative reporting to adversary journalism that was not contributing to a well-informed citizenry. This practice has effectively lessened media’s credibility. The Importance of Media and Media Credibility Being the gateway of information in every stage of society’s development, media must be ranged against its impact to its audience. As the gatekeeper, it is media’s responsibility to open or close the gate on a story based on its truthfulness or shape how it is to be presented. Whether this is the old or the new media, the responsibility for truthfulness is not diminished. The new media referred to here is the computer and the Internet. Studies indicate that media credibility is established when users find the information contained therein as accurate or correct (Dillard and Pfau, 2002). However, due to the openness and easy accessibility of the Internet to the publishing of any information of any kind, credibility has become a major concern (Dillard and Pfau, 2002). Dealing with the Problem There is no need to underscore the importance of media and its credibility. Media is very important, in fact critically important, to man. Chris Worsnop (2010) of the Center for Media Literacy describes media as the interpreter of the past, the definer of our place in the world, the source of modern culture and entertainment, the seed for critical thinking, the bridge of our communication with the world, our leverage for innovation, the interpreter of our values, the platform to experience our environment. Conclusion It is apparent that irrespective of what media would prevail in the end, credibility will be an important issue. It is already good that the reasons are known for the diminution; what is equally good is that the elements that can put the characteristic afloat are also known and can be harnessed with specificity to make the media serve its purpose for mankind. It is this writer’s opinion that while Internet may lord it over the whole media world, the old media will stay for all its emotional significance. But it is imperative that declining media credibility is arrested before it plummets to indefinable levels. As Andrew Kohut of the Pew Research Center that undertook the credibility poll, “Today, we have a public that is suspicious of the values of news media. I don’t know if it is a crisis, but it is a hell of a growing problem!” Some cues can be borrowed from companies that once had credibility problems with the publics they serve. Johnson & Johnson proved that credibility could be regained after it is lost (Healy, 2005). Johnson & Johnson made a complete genuine expression of its regret over the Tylenol incident and tried to “behave with the public interest at heart.” It was an image regained. A media makeover may be all that is necessary for media to slowly cover the credibility gap (Healy, 2005) that is developing. Or perhaps some proactive stance may be necessary. Since credibility is a matter of perception, a perfect beginning point would be the source. Whether it is the old or new media, an honest-to-goodness look at professionalism of media itself could slowly turn the tide. References: Aggarwal, S. (1989). Media Credibility. New Delhi: Mittal Publications Browning, L., Saetre, A., Stephens, K. and Sornes, J. (2008). Information and Communications Technology in Action. New York: Routledge Cardwell, S. (2000). Studying Media. Great Britan: Trotman & Company CBSNews (2009). Poll: News Media’s Credibility Plunges, Associated Press, September 14, 2009. Accessed March 4, 2012: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/09/14/business/main5309240.shtml Dillard, J. and Pfau, M. (2002). The Persuasion Handbook. California: Sage Publications Healy, P. (2005). Believe It: The Media’s Credibility Headache Gets Worse, The New York Times, May 22, 2005. Accessed March 5, 2012: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/22/weekinreview/22healy.html Maier, T. (2004). News Media’s Credibility Crumbling, WorldNetDaily, May 8, 2004. Accessed March 4, 2012: http://www.wnd.com/2004/05/24533/ Mayo, A. and Nahria, N. (2005). In Their Time: The Greatest Business Leaders of the 20th Century. Massachusetts: Harvard School Press OECD, (2010). Trends in the Internet Age. OECD Publications Pratte, P. (1995). Gods within the Machine. Cincinatti: Praeger Publishers Sparks, G. (2010). Media Effects Research. Massachusetts: Cengage Learning Stacks, D. and Salwen, M (2009). An Integrated Approach to Communication Theory and Research. New York: Routledge Straubhaar, K. (2009). Media Now: Understanding Media, Culture and Technology. Cengage Learning WorldNetDaily, (2004). News Media’s Credibility Crumbling, May 8, 2004: Accessed March 4, 2012: http://www.wnd.com/2004/05/24533/ Worsnop, C. (2010). 20 Important Reasons to Study the Media, Center for Media Literacy. Accessed March 4, 2012: http://www.medialit.org/reading-room/20-important-reasons-study-media Read More