Examine the 10 Most E-Mailed Stories on the New York Times Web site for Friday , August 27. When you consider them as a whole, do any consistent themes or preoccupations (on the part of journalists or readers or both) emerge? What does the list suggest is the primary function of the press in America today (informing, entertaining, rumor-mongering, counseling, editorializing advertising)? How does that make you feel (optimistic, light-headed, despairing) about the direction of the press and the society it serves? Your response is due -- remember, no late responses are given credit -- by noon Sunday, August 29.
(By the way, I added the NPR link to Links of Interest.)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
19 comments:
There's very little "hard news" that's on the list. In fact, from what I can tell, only one (the one about the hip replacement recall) is the only one that could be defined as such. Everything else is either news about technology, news about people as a whole, and even one about the effects of technology on people as a whole.
It's all very self-centered. Most of it is about how things affect us. From the op-ed about ignorance to the feature on twenty-somethings to the new Kindle, it's all about the effects of such things on our own lives and what it means for us.
I do think that this reflects more on the audience than it does on the New York Times specifically, though. It's a list of the most e-mailed so it's obviously going to be self-centered. I've seen that feature on twenty-somethings spread like wildfire amongst my age group because it's pertinent to us. I'm not going to be emailing anyone about the effects of the flood on Pakistan's infrastructure because, to be honest, nobody would really care.
If ALL that were available on the New York Times was as self-centered as the articles that are the most popularly circulated, then I think it'd be something to really worry about. Instead, I think it's something to worry about only a little.
don't you think the fact that these types of stories are the most popular indicates that people have a very limited definition of "news"?
Yes and no. If you look at the "most blogged" articles, there's some real news there: corruption in the CIA, the closing of firehouses, stuff about the Senate primaries, all of which would qualify as "news."
Looking at the "most e-mailed" skews the perspective in such a way that it focuses on what "normal people" (as in "not bloggers,") find interesting and want to share, which is "news" about themselves.
So yes, people do have an enclosed view on the news, but that scope widens amongst people who consider themselves a part of the news media (bloggers).
Out of the ten stories, four involved technology. It seemed kind of silly in a way. People are reading about technology and the effects it has on us. They are reading through technology, about technology, and then sending the stories to others via email. It’s like we want to know what technology is doing to us, but we don’t plan on doing anything about it when we find out.
The stories were all pretty self-absorbed. The stories were about our thoughts, our futures, our children, our brains, etc. None involved foreign affairs.
I think the stories were informative, but not hard hitting. They seemed to be more thought provoking than anything else. At first I didn’t feel hopeless when I read the list of the Top 10 E-mailed stories because they were informative stories, but after thinking about it for a little I realized that people who read the New York Times are hardly representative of the general public.
Out of the ten most E-mailed stories on the New York times, the content generally consisted of articles which were more self help than informative stories. They seemed like quick facts that your mother would mail to you and say "I told you so" or "watch out for this...," rather than hard hitting news from around the world.
I think this says that people when quickly surfing the internet are looking for entertainment and small bits of information but not anything that can be detrimental to your well-being for the day.
This is kind of depressing but the other article which are more along the lines of hard news serve a purpose too. It does not mean that they are not reading the stories it only shows that it's not popular to send.
If I may interrupt. . . what I see is a lot of opinion, a lot of lifestyle (consumer-type) features . . . and not much in the way of investigative or hard-news reporting. . . What is the press for? What is the First Amendment for? What are we doing with out freedom? Freeing others, as Toni Morrison suggested we should?
To answer Professor Good's most recent comment, sure, we have freedom of the press, but I feel like it's taken advantage of in today's society. I don't really know what that freedom means. I don't really know what the press is for. I used to think that the "press" and the media were two different things, that you would never compare a journalist reporting on a political event to that of Perez Hilton. As far as what we're doing with our freedom, we're definitely blurring the lines of what's important and what isn't.
I'm typing this with a headache, partially due to the fact that I've been staring at one screen after another all day, but also partially because of how heavily we rely on learning things that don't matter.
I read the top ten emailed stories for today, and most of them are about how America is in trouble, and a large part of them mention one crazy opinion after another that people have about our president. I had no idea who Glenn Beck was before reading over the titles, but now I know that he is among many that still have a problem with President Obama's race. How is that STILL relevant? 'm constantly wondering what direction America is going in, and whether or not it's at all a good one. It makes me nauseous, all of this, about my inability to define what the press is for and what news is, and about the reliance we have on technology, and certainly about the relevancy of the stories I see daily.
Almost every story on the top ten e-mailed stories list was not a news story but a feature story. None of the stories involved hard news. It is easy to see why these stories are the most emailed stories. People share things that attention grabbing but still light and entertaining. Another thing these stories have in common is the ludicrous headlines. An article titled "Can your Preschooler be Depressed" is likely to grab anyone's attention, and motivate them to share with others.
This list suggest that people go to a website like the New York Times as a source of entertainment or even distraction. People no longer go to the press for information but they go to the press for distraction from their busy lives. The press, just like every other form of news media, has lost its responsibility as the public watchdog. People look to the press for celebrity news and government scandals. Society has muted themselves to real news. The daily paper is dead, people can surf the web for news, and are able to select the stories they want to read. Now that people have a choice they want to read about interesting features, especially ones that don't effect their lives in any particular way. It worries me that so many people can tune out what is actually going on in the world and focus their attention on petty stories with flashy headlines and cool pictures.
I noticed a few consistent themes on the NY Times top 10 most e-mailed list. A few articles dealt with technology, which to me makes sense. People who visit NYTimes.com are more likely to be tech savvy and interested in what the latest news is in technology compared to traditional newspaper readers. Other articles were about politics and a few self-interest pieces like parent related issues.
I think these themes suggest that the press's role in the lives of the American people is to inform and entertain. The NY Times is a highly respectable and sophisticated publication. It's readers are looking for cutting edge stories but they are people too. I would not say that the Times is trying to counsel their readers who are dealing with their children going away to college for the first time. There are plenty of readers who are facing issues like that and can relate to the article, therefore they will find it interesting and share it with other people going through the same thing.
As long as the material is interesting to it's readers and the standard of journalism stays high, I believe the American press will be successful in serving the public. News is what the masses find interesting, and if people are e-mailing stories to one another than I believe they are doing a good job.
All the stories, save some who could arguably be considered "hard" news, are based on entertainment values. It seems like a trend in the media today, in which they disguise opinion, trend, or feature pieces as quality news. Very little facts are being given, and it seems that the reports are on ephemeral events, thoughts, and opinions -- they solve very little, and leave the reader hollow after reading.
This leaves me disheartened in terms of the American Press, because as Professor Good indicated, this leaves Americans with a very limited view of news. If these articles are the most e-mailed stories, than that means that people found it interesting enough to share, and the people receiving these e-mails believes these articles to be news because their friend had enough initiative to actually e-mail to them. I think this alone proves that degradation of news (NY Times is supposed to be one of the last 'real' news outlets), so if the Times are guilty of this new-age media, then what are we to really do?
It seems the never ending cycle continues to revolve, in which media and the public are guessing at what news will sell, as opposed to what news is news, and since both sides keep indulging in the sensationalism of news, then a change is unlikely to come.
The ten most e-mailed stories on the NYtimes web site were definitely not too surprising. There were a few differences between the articles but for the most part they all shared soe commonalities. All of the articles were in some way giving the readers information, whether it be an opinion about something or straight facts about an issue. Even the articles that were politcal or meant to be more factual and less opinionated, you can still get a feeling of the writiers own thoughts.For example, in the article "Retirement Haven Haunts Youthful Violators", it was meant to be an informational piece, but the author's personal opinion clearly crept in when going into detail about how "compassionate" the owner of the retirement home was.
I think that opinionated pieces are the things that make America what it is today. Everyone wants to be heard, wants their thoughts out there, and wants to be known. No matter what, I believe that our mentality as a society is based off the things we surround ourselves with, mostly the press and the media.
When the press is filling our minds with hundreds of different opinions on issues disguised as "news" and "information", it is bound to rub off on us. Therefore, we instinctively express ourselves as boldly as the press does each and everyday.
The stories in the most e-mailed category give an interesting cross section of what people are interested in news wise or, as we have observed, what people are most entertained by news wise.
I noticed that a good amount of the stories have to do with technology something that is a direct example of what we observed in class on Thursday, media for the media. The fact that stories about technology make up a large percent of the most e-mailed stories on nytimes.com gives us a clear example of the cycle set in place by the media: glorify cutting edge devices, people buy them by the crate full, use them to read/hear about the next device, lather, rinse, repeat.
This whole cycle makes me feel a little queasy. Part of a news organization’s mission is to make money, which they can do a lot easier if everyone has an iPad or a Blackberry. So, if publishing articles about devices or about emerging technological trends helps generate revenue, then there might be more motivation to write these stories than just to inform the public about a cool gadget.
After examining these emailed stories I have noticed that each story is an editorial. They are usually written by a journalist who has a strong view about certain subjects that are mainly not discussed in the major headlines of the news. These stories range from past events to new discoveries of health, science, travel, politics, religion and government. However, all these stories seem to have a similar theme or affect on the readership. They are all feature stories and go more in depth about issues throughout the world and some entertainment. These emailed articles are in contrast to the daily news which gives readers a quick summary of what has occurred in the world for the day. It seems that the majority of the articles in the list were for editorializing, informing and minor entertaining. It makes me feel optimistic that not all the important news is gone. In my opinion the New York Times is still the leader of informing important news and issues of the world in which people should read about. When reading these types of feature stories, you get a closer look at issues and almost begin to sympathize with certain situations that you may have not understood before.
The top ten e-mailed stories are stories that are easy to read.They are stories that people can read quickly, understand, and take something away from it. When people are sitting down at a computer they normally are not looking to sit down and read one story for too long. The also usually don't want to read a story that has them thinking about things that are too serious. If there was a way measure how many physical articles were shared (someoone pointing out an article to someone else or suggesting they take a look a it ) there would most definitely be a difference.
What I have seen is a lot of opinion pieces and a lot of self-help articles. These are articles that people can easily relate to. It is what people WANT to read. "News" to them is what direclty affects them.
After examining the top 10 Most E-mailed Stories on the New York Times web site the theme of technology stood out. Most of the articles were related to technology, while others were about other things from a hip replacement recall to how retirement haunts youthful violators.
I believe that the purpose of these pieces is to inform the readers about a variety of different news related issues. Even though some are more significant than others each has its own purpose it is trying to convey to the reader. I think that the press is job is to communicate this information to the readers by voicing their opinions about different things and making them available. Today going on the web is easier for some then buying a newspaper. Because of that making these articles accessible online allows for an easier way to obtain the information for many people.
The 10 most emailed stories is definitely an interesting list. I think what's also very telling is that along side the most emailed, most blogged and most searched lists there is a Most Popular Movies list. One of these things is not like the other but I think that shows just how much current journalism thinks they must pander to an audience more concerned with being entertained than anything else.
Most of the most emailed stories are lighter, more feature-y tyep pieces which makes sense. You generally don't email you friends about a grisly double homicide. I think in that respect it's misleading to even look at the most emailed stories. I don't think you can expect much hard news to be there. People don't generally want to share catastrophes with each other.
The most blogged about list could definitely be more of a guide to the current themes and preoccupations of readers and journalists. While there is some crossover between the lists, it is clear that people engaged in current events are using blogs to talk about them rather than just emailing their friends, which is a decidedly less open forum for ideas.
Right now, I don't know how I feel about the direction of the press. I think we are experiencing the death throes of conventional journalism and the digital revolution is too young to really have made the impact that I think it soon will. Once digital completely takes over I can only hope that the Internet becomes a place where journalists can do hard hitting reports and people will read them.
This is late, but my opinion will still be heard.
I often frequent the top ten most emailed just to see the "must read" articles on the times. But everytime im thoroughly dissapointed because the articles are either relationship blogs or movie reviews and other superfluous articles.
When I see that Im always disappointed. I expect to see the most interesting and intelligent articles, but I dont. However is it fair to judge the press on what the mass populous feels is important? Just because the masses want entertainment doesnt change what the press's primary function is.
Sorry for my tardiness, I've been traveling all day back from my cousin's bar mitzvah in Atlanta, I hope this still counts.
Looking at the 10 most emailed stories it seems pretty clear to me that people like to email their friends about not so tremendously important things.
This is considerably different from the most blogged and even most searched. I think the main reason this is so is because people constantly email each other interesting tidbits, rather than hard hitting news stories.
For example, the Mosque that is being built near ground zero is not in the top ten most emailed stories. However, the majority of people know at least something about that story. It is the stories that people can relate to, the weird, off-beat things that are the most emailed.
I think this doesn't necessarily show that we are doomed to unintelligent people who care only about entertainment. Instead, I believe this simply shows what lies in the trend of emailing. I personally get emails from my mother constantly about things going on in the Jewish World.
We don't usually even talk about these articles in person, it is just something interesting she saw and thought to pass along to me. The more important issues we actually discuss when we see each other.
I also do not think this list can really show what the primary function of the press seems to be, since the New York Times website has plenty of hard news stories and fluff stories. It says more about the people who read the news, and what they want to read, given the ability to pick and choose.
It seems that giving the public complete freedom to choose their news might eventually lead to our demise, because not enough people will care about the things that actually matter.
Sorry for my tardiness, I've been traveling all day back from my cousin's bar mitzvah in Atlanta, I hope this still counts.
Looking at the 10 most emailed stories it seems pretty clear to me that people like to email their friends about not so tremendously important things.
This is considerably different from the most blogged and even most searched. I think the main reason this is so is because people constantly email each other interesting tidbits, rather than hard hitting news stories.
For example, the Mosque that is being built near ground zero is not in the top ten most emailed stories. However, the majority of people know at least something about that story. It is the stories that people can relate to, the weird, off-beat things that are the most emailed.
I think this doesn't necessarily show that we are doomed to unintelligent people who care only about entertainment. Instead, I believe this simply shows what lies in the trend of emailing. I personally get emails from my mother constantly about things going on in the Jewish World.
We don't usually even talk about these articles in person, it is just something interesting she saw and thought to pass along to me. The more important issues we actually discuss when we see each other.
I also do not think this list can really show what the primary function of the press seems to be, since the New York Times website has plenty of hard news stories and fluff stories. It says more about the people who read the news, and what they want to read, given the ability to pick and choose.
It seems that giving the public complete freedom to choose their news might eventually lead to our demise, because not enough people will care about the things that actually matter.
Post a Comment