Negative Effects of News from Social Media - Assignment Example

Negative Effects of News from Social Media The popularity of social media as a source of news information is at an all time high. Americans are increasingly shunning mainstream media sources to social media outlets. It is necessary to understand sources of news and their validity because they affect the functioning of the society. A population that is concerned and informed about relevant facts and issues ensures national growth. Recently, media outlets focus on ratings rather than the provision of reliable information. Similarly, bloggers and other social media outlets such as facebook seem to have outdone them because they report ‘breaking news’ even before media outlets break the news. It is difficult to differentiate ‘fake news’ from ‘real news’ in the current society. This is especially true because reliable news comes from unreliable sources. The news from social media has negative effects for audience. Jason Zinser explores the impact of fake news to the American society. So-called fake news programs present a potential problem of deception and dilution. He cites The Daily Show as an example of a program that is likely to misguide Americans because it has no accurateness, impartiality, or journalistic honesty. Although such traits characterize it, it is still widely regarded as among the main sources of information on national events for the population. Entertainment dilutes the news, and fails to highlight its seriousness. In the end, Americans fail to get important information from the news, or derive clues on pertinent information such as terror attacks. Social media at times shape people’s perception of the outside world in a negative manner. This calls for the need of quality information for viewers because it determines their actions and interactions with other cultures that they view on television. Social media should not hold itself to similar journalistic standards that traditional news outlets hold. It is difficult to enhance integrity and responsible news coverage is a station solely focuses on improving its ratings. Jason cites the example of The Daily Show, which uses comedy in trivial news issues that require utmost seriousness. It may be difficult for viewers to differentiate between newsworthy events and pure entertainment. In a similar note, negative consequences result from particular forms of media. Sexist music videos are examples of media forms that may have a negative impact on the society, even though that may not have been the original intention of its creators. Program creators must demonstrate accountability in their productions owing to their role in the society. They have the obligation to present a responsible product to the market that does not compromise their integrity as a newsworthy agency. Fake news dilutes and undermines the reliability and substance of hard news. Blogs and other substitute forms of media, deride journalism, and undermine viewer’s assurance in news agencies. Considering they focus more on entertainment, and ridicule of events, it is more of a humorous show, rather than a news show. This is relatable to a classroom setting in which teachers are torn between teaching students in a conventional manner that the curriculum recommends, or try to inject entertainment and humor into teaching to ensure maximum concentration from students. There are bright students who have good concentration levels, and there are those who virtually sleep in class. The challenge is up to the teacher to dilute information specified by the curriculum to engage students, or have a strict focus on the curriculum and end up having disinterested students. If students excel in class while following a strict curriculum, the teacher will receive praise. In contrast, if the teacher’s efforts in creating an entertaining environment results in poor results, the teacher may have to face disciplinary action. For that reason, dilution of news is a thorny issue because of its negative side in terms of misinformation and dilution of news. The internet has changed research strategies in the society in a myriad of negative ways. While the quantity of information at disposal has significantly increased, the quality does not seem to have increased. In the contemporary society, everybody has a mobile gadget or access to a computer, and can post anything online at any given time. The situation is similar for online academic journals that are posted on several libraries, unlike in previous generations where there were few quality journals. The availability of a myriad of sources merely increases the quantity of information, but does not in any way enhance the aspect of quality. Alternative sources to hard news serve as a detriment to the quality of news, and this is the case with “The Daily News”. People update news about current events on Facebook and twitter, which news media outlets pick up and broadcast. The traditional forms of news collection through personal visits to a field are diluted as social media makes journalists’ work easy. The negative aspect of this is that it may provide erroneous news to the public, some of which may be half-baked, while others may be not firsthand, in terms of personal interviews. Social media has a negative influence on the presentation of news on other traditional news sources. The culture of mixing news and entertainment seems to have apparently spilled over to hard media outlets. Profit making is an agenda of all businesses, including traditional media sources. To catch up with competition, they have to modify their strategies and adopt current forms of transmitting information. In the end, they ape social media and their presentation of information, and this result in untold dilution. In the end, the competition goes to a level of choosing stylish news anchors over those with substance. For example, a media company chose Katie Couric as the lead anchor of the CBS Nightly News because of her sense of fashion, at the expense of substance in terms of quality of information. Content creators are hurriedly scrapping off boring presenters from television sets, as the dilution effect takes over, and presenters with an engaging personality are necessary to popularize news programs and keep viewers engaged. Hard news continues to get softer as the attraction to ‘fake’ news overrides hard news. Stevens discusses the evolution of TV programs and the complications they have developed over the decades. The storylines are much more complex than previous programs. In addition, there are too many commercials in between episodes of programs. He questions whether television actually makes people smarter or dumber. Concerning the new forms of programs, television shows understand that their audience’s main considerations are attention, patience, retention (Stevens 1). In consequence, television stations go to great lengths to provide engaging programs that capture the attention of their audiences and retain them in their network. Social media outlets lack depth and insight in the news it presents. ‘Fake’ news needs to improve on the depth of information it offers the public. Although it provides beneficial information on critical issues such as government policies, it only scratches the surface and gives a person the impression that they are aware of current events, yet they maybe only know the titles. News should be more than just the surface information, but provide a deep insight into trivial matters (Zinser 371). The Daily News, for instance, has the ability to comment on news stories through sarcasm because it does not face the constraints of traditional news. They are able to dig deeper on stories without reproach from authorities. Cynicism, parody, and satire are other advantages that ‘fake’ news has over traditional media forms. This means that they have a wide variety of news sources and have the ability to tap a large audience. They have more freedom to say some things that traditional media news anchors would shy away from saying on camera. As such, they have a significant advantage that they should exploit to feed the public with more beneficial information. Despite the criticism, ‘fake’ news has some advantages and benefits for its audience and the society. A significant section of the population would otherwise not have watched hard news. In the course of watching the ‘fake’ news riddled with entertainment, they catch a point or two about substantial news such as foreign affairs or government policies (Zinser 370). There is substantial evidence that those who watch ‘fake’ news get more information on foreign affairs as compared to their counterparts who strictly watch hard news. The contemporary society constitutes people with ever-shrinking attention spans. ‘Fake’ news provides a means of concentration for such individuals and ensures they hold their concentration until the end. As such, albeit unintentional, it taps an untapped segment of the market that would otherwise be unacquainted. This significant advantage requires maximum exploitation because of its appeal to the different audiences. It is a potent tool for political and social change as devices such as satire can ridicule the government and unintentionally institute change. In conclusion, social media presents negative effects than advantages. It is a conventional way of communicating vital news information that augurs well with a section of the populace, but fails to provide adequate details for its viewers. Mixing entertainment and education dilutes the value of education, and the same applies to mixing entertainment with news. Traditional forms of media reported news in a comprehensible manner that provided a great deal of insight, unlike new forms of social media that merely satirize events through basic information. Quantity is emphasized over quality, as more news is disseminated with minimal details. The advantage is that it attracts a wider audience and people who would have originally had no interest in news. In the end, the disadvantages signify its unreliability as a news source. Works Cited Stevens, Dana. Thinking Outside the Idiot Box. Surfer Girl. TV and Popular Culture. 2005. Zinser, Jason. The Good, the Bad, and the Daily Show. Read More