Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Media Literacy’ Category

Lesson 333 TV News Coverage Vs. Hype?

Posted in Lessons Learned, Media Literacy, Public Affairs on July 13, 2016| Leave a Comment »

Have you seen and heard CNN’s “Trump Rocks Cleveland” spot? My first reaction was: “Since when did you go beyond handing this candidate free exposure every time he made outlandish remarks to become his pro bono advertising agency?”

Then I saw a spot on a local Dallas news channel with fast-paced dramatically edited coverage of the street cop killings set to dramatic music. This time I thought: “Is this hype necessary right now?”

After analyzing the TV coverage of recent protests, demonstrations, shootings and terrorist attacks, I believe that endless dramatic images of potentially volatile events are likely to reinforce previous biases and positions, and that constant repetition of those images eventually will increase anger which often can lead to violent behavior in a significant number of people. And at minimum, all this is likely to produce greater polarization, wider divisions, and a climate that makes constructive collaboration almost impossible.

Of course, TV news is not the only villain. Many politicians, pundits, protest leaders, and angry citizens are at fault too. But have we not reached the point where we can at least ask that the TV coverage intensity of potentially volatile events be significantly lowered in favor of more basic matter-of-fact reporting?

And is it also not time for national and local media to focus more on reporting about groups with constructive solutions and the community leaders who are proposing them?

 

Read Full Post »

Lesson 332. The News Media as Agenda Setter?

Posted in Higher Education, Lessons Learned, Media Literacy, Public Affairs, Strategic Communication on July 9, 2016| 1 Comment »

A professor of mine some years ago argued that the news media set the social agenda and our peers determine our beliefs, reactions and actions. But many in the news media argue to the contrary that society’s leaders determine the agenda and journalists just report the events.

The horrible events resulting in the death of 5 police officers in Dallas this week had cable news pundits talking. Some blamed today’s polarized attack-style debating as keeping the kind of leadership we need from emerging.  If this is the case, who should fix it?

Could it be that the news media themselves reward outrageous attacks with big headlines and continuous coverage and therefore share some blame in accelerating angry responses? And could it also be that any leader trying to be sensible about addressing social issues will not get the coverage he or she needs to be effective?

That said, can Dallas become the lesson that persuades some media organizations to step out and assert that they indeed will put critical issues at the top of their agenda and will reward those with viable solution-based ideas with the coverage they need and deserve?

And furthermore, since our most critical issues are community-based (poverty, policing, homegrown terrorism, public health, etc.) is this not a real opportunity for local news organizations to downplay the sensational stories that have become the focus of too many, and finally become the constructive problem-solving forces their citizens need most?

Read Full Post »

Lesson 331 The Impact of TV on Terrorist Attacks

Posted in International, Lessons Learned, Media Literacy, Public Affairs, Strategic Communication on July 5, 2016| Leave a Comment »

The recent rash of terrorist bombings raises questions once again about the impact of TV when covering violent events.  Certainly 24/7 cable’s non-stop breaking news reporting gives terrorists the terror-producing publicity they seek. But it’s also true that the public needs information about what is going on.

It is a perplexing problem. How much does dramatic TV coverage of terrorist attacks give the public essential information, and how much inspires more terrorism?

For example, does constantly saying “this is the worst mass killing in US history” repeat important information or mostly just enhance the dramatic effect? Or is this the best time to have partisan legislators argue the gun issue on TV?  Or does continuous dramatic repetition of the violence play too much into the hands of the terrorists? Or is labeling every minor update more “breaking news” really helpful?

Since the stakes are so incredibly high is it asking too much for television reporters to tone down the words they choose, use caution in how and where they point their cameras, edit scenes more carefully, and exercise more repetition restraint? I understand this request is asking a lot from a medium that is inherently dramatic. Keeping an audience emotionally connected is good for business. But it’s difficult to ignore the possibility that continuous dramatic coverage of terrorist attacks is a strong factor in producing more terror.

That said, I must also call once again for more media consumer education in public schools, community groups, associations, and in our homes. In this digital TV and social media world news consumers simply must become better editors and critics of what they consume… and they must also come to understand how media revolutions have changed them and their society.

 

Read Full Post »

Lesson 326 News and Escalating Violence

Posted in Lessons Learned, Media Literacy, Public Affairs, Strategic Communication on June 6, 2016| Leave a Comment »

We are entering an unprecedented stage in a bewildering presidential primary campaign. The shouting is degenerating into violence. It’s obvious that the candidates are the shouters. But does the news media have some additional responsibility at this new stage in the campaign?

After all it’s difficult to deny the insatiable appetite of 24/7 cable news for constant new and dramatic statements to report, and the tendency of well-crafted television reporting to turn demonstrations into emotion-filled drama.

It seems to me that there are only two ways to describe the news media’s responsibility when it comes to escalating violent situations: Either they should only describe what is said, show what is happening at demonstrations, and bear no responsibility; or they should assume the additional responsibility to express disapproval of untrue hate statements, and work hard to minimize dramatic camera work and commentary during violent demonstrations.

Freedom of speech might guarantee the right to shout. But it also guarantees the news media the right to challenge lies aggressively and to communicate only what they know to be true. What we have here now is an interesting tension between what has become “the business of the news” and “the public’s interest and need to know.”

After years of study and professional practice it seems to me that the dynamics of aggressive debates evolve this way:

Outrageous remarks shock and get our attention. But when repeated incessantly people quickly get used to hearing them. So then remarks get even more outrageous to keep attention. Now opponents need to match those statements or risk being ignored. In today’s digital technology world dramatic attacks will “trump” thoughtful policy messages every time, especially when it comes to news coverage the next day! Eventually rage mounts and violence results.

So it seems to me that as outrageous shouting escalates the news media must assume an escalating responsibility to report only the facts, refrain from giving overexposure to outrage, and minimize the use of dramatic language and production techniques.

We might feel that whoever started the attacks is the most responsible for the violence. But another reality of today’s digital media world is that people tend to forget what happened yesterday and their anger grows in intensity with each day’s news.

Read Full Post »

Lesson 322 News or Entertainment?

Posted in Lessons Learned, Media Literacy, Strategic Communication on May 9, 2016| Leave a Comment »

At the recent White House Correspondent’s Dinner President Obama mildly referenced the media’s inability to resist giving extreme candidates daily exposure and expressed his appreciation for those who have continued the struggle to cover the issues.

The problem is that when a critical mass of 24/7 cable outlets give daily exposure to outrageous attacks and name-calling traditional journalists  often end up getting dragged into the circus. They seem to fear looking like they are missing something and that if they don’t participate in the drama they will lose their audience the next day.

The digital media world has created such an appetite for fast-paced emotional news that even traditional journalists can feel forced to keep looking for the next attention-grabber. This can lead to beginning every newscast with shouting the words “breaking news,” or promising “new developments” in a story where there are none, or promoting an “exclusive” interview where  nothing important is learned. And then rapid-fire anchors combined with  fast-paced editing help reinforce the emotion.

Each day it can seem that more and more news outlets are moving away from facts-based reporting and more toward fast-paced entertainment. For many it can feel like it’s much more than just making information more interesting. Indeed, the new media world seems to be producing an audience that is more attracted to the drama of the moment than mind-expanding information?

The only answer I can see for society is more media literacy education. This can take place in schools, PTA’s, professional associations, civic groups, nonprofit organizations, the media itself, etc. Apparently digital media has the power to massage us into preferring emotional experiences over  educational ones. And if that’s the case it’s hard to fix a problem that much of the general public doesn’t even recognize.

Read Full Post »

Lesson 321 The Transparency Dilemma

Posted in Higher Education, Leadership, Lessons Learned, Media Literacy, Strategic Communication on May 3, 2016| Leave a Comment »

When communicating organizations or causes it’s difficult not to believe in complete transparency.

Back in the day when I was helping organizations with their strategic communication planning I often strived to implement a total transparency policy. Making all the data public just seemed like the right thing to do.

But when trying to explain the truth in complicated situations I quickly learned the hard way that adversaries and competitors alike can make almost any counter-argument sound credible when they have all the data they want at their finger tips. In fact, one colleague once quipped, “Give me all your numbers and I can show you how to defend any point of view!” And if that is true for organizations, what about political campaigns?

Some candidates may claim transparency, but in today’s 24/7 news media environment any effort to achieve it quickly goes out the window. The media’s appetite for a constant flow of attention grabbing statements fuels a widespread practice of carefully selecting facts, exaggerating them, and then finding new ones whether or not they are completely relevant. This then can easily slip into outright lying. Any attempt at transparency simply gives the competition too much to work with.

So maybe complete transparency is not what we really should ask from organizations or political campaigns. Maybe all we need is the truth and nothing but the truth… along with the evidence necessary to substantiate it!

 

 

Read Full Post »

Lesson 320 Fine Tuning the Theme

Posted in Higher Education, Lessons Learned, Media Literacy, Strategic Communication on April 27, 2016| Leave a Comment »

A university executive once said to me, “Your problem, Lauer, is you think every problem is a communication problem.”  At first I tried to convince him otherwise. But in retrospect I really have come to believe that most serious issues and problems really do have significant communication components, and this blog reinforces that perspective every week.

So I fine-tuned the theme to: Lessons in Communication.

Weekly posts will continue to address the challenges of… making individuals, organizations, and causes better understood; understanding  the psychic and social consequences of media revolutions, dealing with the impact of 24/7 journalism and social media;  exploring the issues  related to politics and foreign policy, and seizing the opportunities of a global higher education industry to improve international understanding, develop truly international leaders, solve persistent global problems, and nudge us much closer to world peace. 

The world keeps getting smaller and smaller. But it also keeps getting more and more confusing. As we strive to make the planet a better place to live this blog will continue to explore the most serious communication and media issues we will face. Whether you are an educator, communication professional, student, or concerned citizen of the planet, I invite you to join me in my ongoing quest to understand why communication always breaks down, what can be done about it, and how media revolutions change everything.

 

Read Full Post »

Lesson 317 Presidents in Crisis

Posted in International, Leadership, Lessons Learned, Media Literacy on April 5, 2016| Leave a Comment »

From a strategic communication perspective the US president’s approach to implementing his administration’s foreign policy has been  thoughtful and pragmatic. He comes across as an intellectual and approaches international problem-solving realistically.

But, I must say I have had difficulty with how he has handled some issues and crises. Two such moments have happened recently:

(1) He publicly expressed disappointment with US allies not getting more engaged with solving the problems in the middle east. While he might be expressing that privately, publicly he should be stressing repeatedly the importance of working together. Reprimanding allies publicly will only alienate them and make matters worse.

(2) The Brussels attacks happened while he was in Cuba. Mistakenly, he must have seen his primary audience as ISIS instead of his citizens because he chose to be pictured in the stands watching a baseball game. He was more determined to demonstrate that terrorists could not disrupt his schedule than to demonstrate real national leadership.

My experience suggests that at moments like this any president needs to move to a setting symbolizing taking control. This is so whether it be the president of the United States or the president of anything else… university, business, nonprofit, etc.

To do otherwise a top leader ends up handing adversaries a strong case for criticizing judgment under pressure, and then followers inevitably lose confidence they need to feel.

Read Full Post »

Lesson 315 Putin in a New Media World

Posted in International, Leadership, Lessons Learned, Media Literacy on March 22, 2016| Leave a Comment »

How can Putin’s words and deeds be interpreted? His rhetoric at home is about recapturing Russian prestige and pride. His actions in the middle east are making a statement about world leadership. At the same time Mr. Putin seems uncharacteristically interested in the US election. And Mr. Trump has on occasion suggested that he can get along with Putin.

Is Putin the Trump of Russia?  And what would their collaboration turn out to mean?

Russia has a rich cultural heritage. It’s history has been tumultuous, but its arts, music, ballet, theater, and literature are often acknowledged to be world-class. The fall of the Soviet Union and the years following were a blow to Russian pride. News stories stressed the struggles of the Russian middle and lower classes, the dysfunction of government, the corruption of government sponsored entities, the questionable practices of wealthy business moguls, and the decline of international prestige.

The situation was ripe in Russia (as in today’s America and 1930’s Germany) for a leader promising a better life and a revision of national pride. Trump promises to restore a stronger version of American exceptionalism. And Putin promises to restore his own brand of Russian exceptionalism. It’s easy to see the appeal. But it’s also difficult to see how powerful promises without “how-to” substance will work.

It seems to me that this is a critical question for our time:  How can we know that the leader who makes inspirational promises is legitimate, honest, transparent, substantive, and honorable… and not manipulative, dishonest, secretive, and self-serving?

Unfortunately, the lesson of the new media world we have yet to learn is how to tell the difference!

Read Full Post »

Lesson 314 New Media and Short Memories

Posted in Lessons Learned, Media Literacy, Public Affairs, Strategic Communication on March 15, 2016| Leave a Comment »

As the political campaign enters the next stage the “media  consequence” question for us now is how many of the lies, attacks, and outrageous remarks we endured in the past will we remember as the candidates very likely will begin to sound more reasonable?

In previous posts I have discussed how ‘lies begin to sound true” and “imploding information produces confusion” in this new media world. Consumers are left having no idea what to believe. Now, as we move ahead we must add still another troubling media consequence: extremely short memories!

Political candidates, institutional critics, and social cause advocates have learned that they can get attention, receive ongoing news coverage, and attract large audiences just by making outrageous statements that include elements of conflict and light  entertainment. Then, once celebrity status is established these same people can change their tone, sound more reasonable, and gradually put distressed people more at ease. The consequence is that we can never be exactly sure of what we are getting in a leader… be it in governments, institutions, or causes. This memory loss and leadership uncertainty stage is what we are entering now in the current political campaign.

Only a society that can fact-check for truthfulness, strong  character and integrity early in the process will be able to trust the people they elect. The problem is that we have not yet learned how to do this in this age of ongoing media revolutions.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »