Based on the way this article pitched these two frames, episodic framing is the easiest template in which to create a captivating 'news' program for TV audiences who turn to their screens for entertainment or relaxation, but not so much for people who seek to critically understand the global narrative of events.
When news is presented episodically, it takes on a much simpler, almost sitcom -like form. You are presented with looping footage of some exciting events; explosions, bombs, rallies, riots, shoot-outs, congressional hearings, police action, soldiers and guns, etc... In this way, the news becomes more exciting or engaging in a shallow and easily digested manner. In fact, I'll bet that most TV viewers wouldn't even sit around to hear their news contextualized.
In our news, especially regarding what we call 'terrorism,' contextualization is almost taboo. For example, news reports commonly address suicide bombings or other violent attacks against American soldiers occupying Afghanistan. The narrative has become quite mundane now. But, I personally have not seen and media endeavor to try and explain the line of reasoning behind people, so filled with desperate rage, driven to the point of blowing themselves up to inflict damage in whatever manner that they can. When presented episodically, it comes to seem natural to us. We don't really question the fact or find it strange that our nation is involved in creating conditions which have prompted violent suicide amongst the native inhabitants to become something semi-standard.
So, as journalists, I think it important to clarify our own manner of presenting the news. Once a trend has been established, then the particular events are not so important as an attempt to contextualize and explain the trend its self. We educate reporters to develop an intellect and go out and tell us what happened, but who is being educated to help us understand why?
Also, I couldn't read chapter 1 of this article. It was absent from the preview version of the article.
When news is presented episodically, it takes on a much simpler, almost sitcom -like form. You are presented with looping footage of some exciting events; explosions, bombs, rallies, riots, shoot-outs, congressional hearings, police action, soldiers and guns, etc... In this way, the news becomes more exciting or engaging in a shallow and easily digested manner. In fact, I'll bet that most TV viewers wouldn't even sit around to hear their news contextualized.
In our news, especially regarding what we call 'terrorism,' contextualization is almost taboo. For example, news reports commonly address suicide bombings or other violent attacks against American soldiers occupying Afghanistan. The narrative has become quite mundane now. But, I personally have not seen and media endeavor to try and explain the line of reasoning behind people, so filled with desperate rage, driven to the point of blowing themselves up to inflict damage in whatever manner that they can. When presented episodically, it comes to seem natural to us. We don't really question the fact or find it strange that our nation is involved in creating conditions which have prompted violent suicide amongst the native inhabitants to become something semi-standard.
So, as journalists, I think it important to clarify our own manner of presenting the news. Once a trend has been established, then the particular events are not so important as an attempt to contextualize and explain the trend its self. We educate reporters to develop an intellect and go out and tell us what happened, but who is being educated to help us understand why?
Also, I couldn't read chapter 1 of this article. It was absent from the preview version of the article.
No comments:
Post a Comment