4

1. Define and discuss two of the following - News Agenda, agenda setting, gate keeping and news values.

The news is inevitably slanted because a culture’s views of the world at large are coloured by a primary interest in ‘its own kind’. This we call ethnocentrism, manifesting itself substantially, though not entirely, in nearness, or proximity.

Strategies of news construction- gatekeeping and agenda setting – are examined in relation to the underpinning criteria of news selection, which we call news values or newsworthiness. Acknowledgement is made of the powerfully competing agendas in contemporary society, which strive to attract and manipulate public attention, and in doing so affect the nature of news production.

From the beginning, then news as a version of reality is skewed by a cultural bias and conditioned by the specifics of situation.

The news is culturally positioned, we view reality through a cultural prism. That the rendition of reality is so convincing is explained partly because the news, frames for us by the media, is usually all that we have to go on as a portrait of realities beyond our known environment; and partly because the news is constructed with such professional skill. Television news suggests that what we see is what there is, that we are being presented with mirror images of reality.

Gatekeeping is about opening or closing the channels of communication. It is abou accessing or refusing access. They are more likely to open the gate- like the news- to knowns rather than unknowns.

Modifications take place to the story as it passé through each gate. At every stage in the mediation process, decisions are taken, not only about what events to cover, but how these might be covered and by whom.

The chief supplier of information is government, and governments regularise the provision of information to the media. Government will provide a certain amount of information in return for the journalist using that information ‘properly’.

The Gatekeeping theory was founded by social psychologist Kurt Lewin in 1943 and examines the manner through which information is categorized for propagation, by reporters, editors, media outlets, advertisers and individuals; whether for publication, broadcasting, the Internet, personal emails and blogs or other modes of communication.

In Lewins 1943 article he identified the various different parts to the process of gatekeeping.

1) Information constantly progresses through different channels. The number of channels and the amount of time of information in each channel varies.

2) In order for information to travel it must pass a “gate” from one channel to the next, such that 3) Forces govern channels. There may be opposing psychological forces causing conflict, which creates resistance to movement through the channel. Further, 4) There may be several channels that lead to the same end result. And 5) Different actors may control the channels and act as gatekeepers at different times.

An agenda is a list of items, usually in descending order of importance. The secretary normally draws up the agenda for a meeting to the meeting in consultation with the meetings chairperson. The skilful chairperson will usually rule by consent, without the need to resort to voting.

The link between media agendas and public perception of what constitutes news is a viral one to explore. If the public look to the media for news, what the media decides is news is what the public recognises as news. What is emphasised by the media is given emphasis in public perception; what media amplifies is enlarged in public perception.

McCombs and Shaw ague that the agenda-setting capacity of the media makes them highly influential in the shaping public perceptions of the world: ‘This ability to affect cognitive change among individuals is one of the most important aspects of the power of mass communication’. The model is an oversimplification, of course. It assumes one agenda- that purveyed by the media- which then becomes the agenda of the public. It can be argues that members of the public have their own agendas, sharpened by their own personal circumstances.

1