Note (12/1/20): I was inspired to revisit this essay given the journalism internship I’m on the verge of completing. It was written for a UMN course in the spring of 2019, and is a bit academic + technical, but I appreciate its message and find it relevant beyond the classroom walls.
If I were to ask you to close your eyes, think hard, and recount if in the past two weeks you caught up on the news — any news — either online, on a news app, through a social media platform, or through any type of podcast or streaming service, what would you say? Well, in all likelihood, you would laugh out loud at me, because the answer is, of course, almost certainly a resounding yes. But, if I were to ask you to close your eyes, think hard, and recount if in the past two weeks you caught up on the news by sitting down in front of a traditional television news broadcast — say, your local 10pm programming — then what would you say?
For the majority of Americans today, in addition to many populations around the globe, the golden age of television news has long since gone; sparsely scattered now are the times in which we gather around the living room TV set, in almost a ritualistic sense, to inform ourselves of the happenings of our local and global communities. What has caused society to shift in this way, and why? How have widespread media consumption patterns morphed extremely rapidly in recent years, and what effect has this had on those working in the television news industry? What are “traditional” journalists and news stations doing to survive, and attempt to remain thriving, in these new-age markets?
I structure the basis of my research, and interest, around these questions, and specifically around the case study of my own parents as long-time journalists. I will first dig into historical precedents regarding both television news consumption and the rise of dominant, new media technologies, then into the new world of labor in television news and its effects on the expected responsibilities of today’s journalists, and finally into theories about the possible future direction and survival of this world of work.
First, in order to preface a discussion surrounding what we may call the ‘new’ world of news production, consumption, and labor, we must reach a certain level of understanding surrounding what we may call that world of ‘old’. Such a label, however, may be a bit of a misnomer, for it is easy to forget that television itself is a very young medium. In comparison to many other cultural forms of communication and entertainment which have spanned the ages — whether they be literature, spoken word, theater, visual art, music, et cetera — television has been around for a mere lifetime, first coming to rise in the late 1920s.
Firm establishment in the American home and commercial industry, however, did not occur until years later, therefore placing the inoculation of the infantile television news industry at around the mid-1940s. Though in its early years, the industry appeared to pose very little threat to established news distributors like newspaper and radio — with one 1950s newspaper writer going so far as to say that, “Television is still a lesser form of news competition.. at this stage it is purely supplemental” (Heflin 2010, p. 94) — TV quickly began to take firm influence over the American populace.
These years, in the decades between approximately 1950 and 1990, make up what many consider to be the “golden age” of traditional TV news broadcasting. According to a 2016 Reuters report, such “traditional broadcasting,” which is the backbone of the television news industry, is defined as “linear, scheduled, real-time programming, whether delivered via terrestrial broadcasting, satellite, cable, or IPTV” (Sambrook 2016, p. 25).
Inherently, then, traditional TV news programming is both catered towards, and only available to, audiences watching at scheduled, real times. The rigidity of this news medium seemed to matter little, though, to an entire generation of Americans who grew up in tandem with the growth of the industry itself. Thus, the memories of author Charles L. Ponce de Leon ring true across the “Golden Age,” when he describes how, “My parents watched it every night at dinnertime, and I remember well the luminous glow of our black-and-white screen and the grim visages of the anchormen we welcomed into our home” (Foust 2017, p. 105).
This idyllic image of the American family consuming American media in the American living room has, however, all but disappeared in our current post-1990s period. The socio-cultural, technological, and economic reasonings behind this paradigm shift away from traditional TV news consumption are varied, and complex. At the same time, it does remain, in essence, a direct result of what we may consider the global social media technology revolution; which catalyzed not only massive information-sharing changes for individuals and communities everywhere, but the necessity of wide-ranging responsive change in the television news industry.
Journalist Zeynep Tufekci cuts to the core of the complicated relationship of new-age social media to traditional media when she states that, “Digital platforms allowed communities to gather and form in new ways, but they also dispersed existing communities, those that had watched the same TV news and read the same newspapers” (Tufekci 2018, p. 2). Though her piece How Social Media Took Us from Tahrir Square to Donald Trump deals more specifically with technology-induced changes in the global political sphere, the basic tenets of her argument remain directly applicable to an in-depth investigation of the television news industry.
My parents, Paul and Jessie Marble, have collectively worked in the TV news business for almost 60 years; my dad as a photojournalist for TMJ4 News, an NBC affiliate station in Milwaukee, and my mom as first a sportscaster, then a professor of journalism, and now a broadcast director for TMJ4. Much of my research into their experiences and perspectives on the state of their industry closely reflects Tufekci’s arguments; that broad societal shifts away from scheduled, static consumption of all types has equally sent the TV news industry reeling, teetering on a slippery slope of societal unimportance.
As my mom stated quite simply when I interviewed both her and my dad, “Appointment TV is simply not attractive nowadays.” And in many ways, why would it be?
An entire generation of Americans has lived not knowing any pre-internet, pre-smartphone, pre-Facebook, pre-Netflix and Amazon Prime and everything-at-the-touch-of-a-button age. And besides the timeless desire of young people to break away from the out-of-style habits of older generations, today’s markets, and our lives, are so saturated with information sharing and receiving platforms that appointment television has seemed to slip out of collective consciousness.
Therefore, it has become quite evident to news providers like my parents’ that if they “do not react to the decline in traditional television viewing and the rise of online video — in particular on-demand, distributed, and mobile viewing — they risk irrelevance” (Sambrook 2016, p. 3).
This has initiated a number of significant changes by TV news providers to the production, distribution, and promotion of their content. Though situated at the micro scale, my parents’ station in Milwaukee nevertheless accurately reflects macro-level trends in the wider industry. The first, and perhaps most overarching, response to study is the incredible boom of digital-based content. They say ‘if you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em,’ and what my parents consider the broadest of all industry shifts is this rise of totally novel media formatting and distribution. It appears unlikely for the golden age of TV news that once was to ever fully return, necessitating industry adaptations to societal consumption patterns — for better or worse.
Because “the rise of the video-enabled internet puts television and digital media in much more direct competition” (Sambrook 2016, p. 6), trying to fell the Goliath of social media technologies is very much a losing proposition for David-like news stations, no matter how well-established in the market they may feel. The task for David, then, becomes finding new niches that appeal both to traditional and new consumer bases. This is especially critical for small-market stations like TMJ4, which have begun in recent years to prioritize breaking news to the public not over scheduled broadcasts, but first over digital platforms. This “Digital first, Television distinct” model of production and distribution is characteristic of the shifting role of the age-old TV broadcast; no longer as the primary hailer of newsworthy stories to the public, but as a secondary angle on previously broken stories, generally giving a more unique, in-depth look at disseminated information.
One positive effect of this new paradigm, according to my parents, is that content is able to be spread much more quickly, to much wider audiences, than ever before; news stations are able to share content rapidly and effectively, cross-pollinating between different markets, and experimenting with entirely new distribution bases such as push notifications, Facebook Live videos, and other “one-stop shops” like Snapchat and Instagram. These benefits, though, are paralleled by industry-wide challenges, namely the over-crowding and rapid conglomeration of the media business.
As my mom put it, “The overall pie is shrinking” for traditional news corporations due to smaller viewership and greater competition to stay afloat, leading to a recent increase of large media conglomerates (i.e. Comcast, Time Warner Inc, Gannett Co.) that buy up smaller, formerly independent to semi-independent news stations. This even occurred several years ago with TMJ4 News upon being bought out by E.W. Scripps Company — bringing with it access to a range of new corporate resources like content sharing, but also the sense of “less freedom of storytelling” at the local level due to stricter corporate oversight. And it is not only the news stations themselves which have had great change brought upon them by the realities of media consumption today; the new world of work for journalists themselves has created a litany of effects, equally complex in nature as those industry-wide, for individuals in TV news.
Although I may often remind my parents of their steadily increasing ages, they are by no means old — yet in today’s TV news business, their skills and knowledge are seemingly much more ancient than their years in the industry reveal. This is a common narrative across the board. Journalists everywhere — like many other professionals facing rapid shifts in technology, innovation, and consumer consumption patterns — are having to adapt to changing work environments and responsibilities. Though “the basics [of journalism] are still the same,” according to my mom, the way it is practiced today is much different. TV news producers must “meet [the consumers] where they are at,” necessitating a broad shift of focus towards digital content.
As a result, perhaps the greatest single industry development in recent years has been the rise of the ‘MMJ’ — the Multimedia Journalist. Whereas previously, TV news journalists tended to hold mostly specialized responsibilities — photographers shooting video, reporters writing stories and doing stand-ups, producers editing and putting together broadcasts — today’s journalists are generally expected to take on more all-encompassing roles, in a ‘jack-of-all-trades’ manner.
This is consistent with many other trends of professional work in the new economy. For example, Gina Neff, in Venture Labor, pointed to the risks for young people entering today’s workforce associated with not diversifying skills and hireability. No longer can most professionals expect to hold one static position in one static industry for the length of a career. Therefore, it makes perfect sense why so many young journalists coming into the TV news business have either been taught, or trained themselves, to run the gamut of marketable skills — in order to take on any journalistic task necessary.
It is important to remember, too, that the rise of the MMJ has not only affected the new generation of journalists, but the older ones too — especially those around my parent’s age. Journalists are coming into the news business at younger and younger ages, bringing with them tech savviness, fresh ideas, and familiarity with media and cultural trends, but also a lack of experience that many established professionals find concerning. It is not an easy job for a journalist these days, often being expected to be able to shoot, write, report on, edit, digitalize, and publicize content all on their own accord, and both younger and older journalists are going through the trials and tribulations associated with these responsibilities.
As my dad puts it, “My role has grown, and I think that had to happen… You have to be multi-dimensional, able to write and produce and do whatever needs to be done.”
In a sense, everyone has to be more and more entrepreneurial to remain an asset, which can be especially problematic for long-time industry workers who have a tougher time than their younger counterparts picking up new, ‘generalist’-type skills and learning how to use increasingly popular technologies and social medias. All across our fast-paced new economies, it is less and less desirable to be über-specialized in a field, and TV news is no different, creating both difficulties for individuals and opportunities for the industry to expand into entirely new arenas of communication.
As for the future, it is near impossible to say for certain where TV news is headed. What will surely remain the same, according to a 2015 BBC News Project, is that, “People can find out what is happening when they want to find out — not when the media companies choose to tell them they can” (BBC News 2015, p. 19).
A return to the ‘golden age’ of scheduled telecasts taking center stage, TV news ratings being high, and digital media being secondary to broadcast media is highly unlikely. So, how traditional media companies and news stations will continue to be relevant and profitable will forever be of their utmost concern. It is clear that putting the power of choice in the hands of the consumer is a necessary tool for the TV news industry. One potential way of furthering this, believes my mom, would be creating “design-your-own newscast” technology, wherein an app-like service would allow consumers to pick and choose stories, or segments of televised broadcasts, that matter the most to them, and then play it back in an uninterrupted stream.
It is hard to know whether such technologies will ever be available, or popularized, but no matter what, maintaining financial stability will be a primary determinant of the survivability of traditional broadcasters. However, the future is certainly not bleak, and this is an exciting time to be involved with the production, distribution, and evolution of news.
For what can be assured, as my mom summarized so succinctly, is that, “There have always been storytellers, and there will always be a place for storytellers going forward.” In her, my, and many others’ eyes, “Journalism and TV news aren’t dying, they’re just changing.”
Jake Marble 