Grade the News

Evaluating print and broadcast news in the San Francisco Bay Area from A to F.

How to Distinguish Between Socially Responsible and Junk Journalism

Commentary by John McManus
Posted October 26, 2003

“You are what you eat,” the nutritionists say. A diet of salty, fatty, or empty calories may taste delicious, but harm your health.

Similarly, a self-governing society’s health depends on its news diet. When the majority of a society knows the name of Laci Peterson’s unborn son, but not who their elected leaders at the city, county or state government are, that society’s health is at risk.

Just as junk food is widely appealing and cheap to produce, junk journalism is entertaining to read or watch and inexpensive to report. Junk sells in an uninformed marketplace. But eventually it makes a body — or body politic — sick. Here’s a guide to discerning between socially responsible and junk journalism.

Characteristics of Responsible News	Characteristics of Junk Journalism
Primary purpose: to maximize public understanding of current issues and events (which requires adequate profit to ensure continuing operation).	Primary purpose: to maximize return to owners and shareholders.
News selection priority: The top of the news treats topics that matter most to the long-term health of the community — government, politics, education, public safety, environment, economy, health, etc. What we need to know trumps what we merely want to know.	News selection priority: Whatever generates the largest audience at the least cost — isolated violent crimes, fires, accidents, unusual events, professional sports, celebrity news, popular fads, stories with powerful visual or human interest appeal. What we want to know trumps what we need to know.
Explanation: Reporting focuses on issues more than events. It shows the big picture, trends, causes, solutions. Brevity is a virtue, but complexity is possible.	Explanation: What is learned from the story is unimportant. Emphasis on isolated events. Complexity is avoided out of fear it may bore those seeking news for entertainment.
Accuracy: Stories contain many facts from those in the know. Speculation is rare. Corrections are routinely run.	Accuracy: Facts may slow the story down. Speculation and broad generalization, often from loud, colorful partisans is encouraged. Few, if any, corrections are run.
Fairness: Reporters have only one bias — all stories are slanted in favor of the common good. When issues have multiple sides, all are given a chance to make their best case.	Fairness: Reporters may take the side they believe is most popular with readers and viewers. Getting multiple sides takes staff time and adds unnecessary length to stories.
Context: Events are placed in a context that makes their meaning clearer. Sources representing varying viewpoints are interviewed since they often see the same event differently.	Context: To avoid boring readers or viewers, what happened within a short time frame is emphasized — the event itself. Few sources with differing viewpoint are interviewed because it adds length and may bore consumers.

Socially responsible journalism is not required by law. The corporations that own news media face pressure to produce whatever earns the best return. You can influence their decision by your own news choices.

Use your power!

What do you think? Discuss it in The Coffeehouse.

A project of the School of Journalism and Mass Communications at San Jose State University, Grade the News is affiliated with the Graduate Program in Journalism at Stanford University and KTEH, public television in Silicon Valley.

Monitoring the Bay Area's most popular news media:

Knight Ridder

Hearst

Knight Ridder

KTVU, Oakland (FOX)

KRON, San Francisco

KPIX, San Francisco (CBS)

KGO, San Francisco (ABC)

KNTV, San Jose (NBC)

Bay Area media advocates:

Media Alliance

Center for the Integration and Improvement of Journalism at SFSU

Maynard Institute

Youth Media Council

Project Censored

New California Media

Society of Professional Journalists, Northern California chapter

National Writers Union Bay Area chapter

Site highlights

THE GROWTH OF FREE NEWSPAPERS

The three-part series follows the rise of three Bay Area handouts:
• Part 1: At free dailies, advertisers sometimes call the shots
• Part 2: Free daily papers: more local but often superficial
• Part 3: Free papers' growth threatens traditional news
• See also: SF Examiner and Independent agree to end payola restaurant reviews
• And: The free tabloid that wasn't: East Bay's aborted Daily Flash

FATE OF KNIGHT RIDDER NEWSPAPERS

Lou Alexander started a firestorm with his original guest commentary predicting the company would be sold. Several other experts on newspapers have weighed in:
• Newspapers can't cut their way back into Wall Street investors' hearts, by Stephen R. Lacy; Alexander responds
• Humbler profits won't encourage buyouts, by John Morton; Alexander responds
• Newspapers can't maintain monopoly profits because they've lost their monopolies, by Philip Meyer
• Knight Ridder in grave jeopardy, by Lou Alexander...

KQED-FM AUDIO PERSPECTIVES BY JOHN MCMANUS

• Leakers and plumbers: There's no difference between a good leak and a bad leak? Journalists need a shield law. 11/22/05
• Unintended consequences: How Craigslist and similar services are sucking revenue from faltering newspapers. 9/13/05
• Is CPB irrelevant? As Congress moves to cut public broadcasting funds, has CPB become obsolete in the modern marketplace. 6/26/05
• The paradox of news: There's more news available and its cheaper than ever before, but fewer young people are interested. 5/12/05

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------