In the Service of Good Journalism and Audience Interests? How Audience Metrics Affect News Quality

Abstract

A large and growing body of literature shows that audience metrics exert a significant influence in many newsrooms around the world. Scholars assume that this might affect the quality of news, but findings on how audience metrics influence news quality and media performance are scattered. Based on a widely used set of news quality criteria, this article is the first to focus on this question. It reviews and discusses the existing findings by considering the influence of audience metrics across four analytical dimensions: A) the allocation of resources and recognition; B) the volume, practices and rhythms of news production; C) the selection and placement of topics; and D) the formats and styles of news presentation. The analysis reveals that journalists’ use of audience metrics has a mainly negative impact on news quality. This effect is the result of both the growing economic pressures on newsrooms and a dominant rhetoric that equates measures of audience size with audience interests and good journalistic work.

La sostenibilidad de los medios a través de los conceptos de engagement y relevancia: scoping review

“…El discurso crítico con la innovación es puntual (Antonopoulos et al, 2020;Creech y Nadler, 2018, Hess;Waller, 2020) o se trata de forma secundaria (Fürst, 2020). Existe un discurso dominante, en parte dominado por think tanks norteamericanos.…”

Temporality of contemporary media usage practices: Types of pauses

“…News producers make content quantity align with how long they think readers will read, news organizations choose the best time to update news for readers (e.g. Ananny, 2018;Fürst, 2020;Tandoc, 2014Tandoc, , 2015. For example, the visualization of The Guardian's audience traffic in Reuters Digital News Report (Newman and Levy, 2014: 47) indicates that while printed version's most popular reading time is in the morning 06.00-08.00, the favoured times for online news are during pauses in the workday, but especially 12.00-13.00.…”

“Good morning, COVID!” the inertia of journalistic imaginaries in morning shows’ online comments

“…Commenters appeared to be assessing morning shows’ content based upon imaginations of idealistic, even nostalgic, notions of what journalism was, is, or could be. Moreover, these imaginations were reminiscent of notions of “good journalism” (Fürst, 2020) and dominant and long-standing constructs and standards against which citizens should – or could – measure journalism (Iggers, 2018; Palmer, 2018). Here, we argue that these imaginaries of conventional journalistic standards in the West – namely that journalism is to be relevant and constructive, not overly negative but critical of the powerful, that which rebukes sensationalism and speculation and embraces transparency and impartiality in its means for social and civic engagement – remain salient with audiences today, despite the massive hybridity of journalism and the blending of “hard” and “soft” news (Edgerly and Vraga, 2020).…”

“…A Amongst the discussion, the notion of “good journalism” (Fürst, 2020), which has largely been discussed in terms of using audience metrics and newsroom debate to identify and assess what “good” is, has been mirrored in research that suggests “good journalism" is not sensational, seeks “truth,” is impartial in its coverage of the powerful, is not overly negative, contributes to social cohesion and civicness, and involves treating subjects of its reporting fairly (Iggers, 2018; Palmer, 2018). Relatedly, scholars have long also found tradititonal or legacy news audiences tend to attribute journalism to its democratic function, while online news audiences turn to comments and social media in an attempt to democratize the act of journalism itself by providing commentary, fact-checking, debate, and criticism of journalistic content (Craft et al, 2015).…”