Hubbry Logo
NewsNewsMain
Open search
News
Community hub
News
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
News
News
from Wikipedia

Konrad Adenauer reading the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung issue of 7 August 1961

News is information about current events. This may be provided through many different media: word of mouth, printing, postal systems, broadcasting, electronic communication, or through the testimony of observers and witnesses to events. News is sometimes called "hard news" to differentiate it from soft media.

Subject matters for news reports include war, government, politics, education, health, economy, business, fashion, sport, entertainment, and the environment, as well as quirky or unusual events. Government proclamations, concerning royal ceremonies, laws, taxes, public health, and criminals, have been dubbed news since ancient times. Technological and social developments, often driven by government communication and espionage networks, have increased the speed with which news can spread, as well as influenced its content.

Throughout history, people have transported new information through oral means. Having developed in China over centuries, newspapers became established in Europe during the early modern period. In the 20th century, radio and television became an important means of transmitting news. Whilst in the 21st century, the internet has also begun to play a similar role.

Meaning

[edit]

Etymology

[edit]

The English word "news" developed in the 14th century as a special use of the plural form of "new". In Middle English, the equivalent word was newes, like the French nouvelles. Similar developments are found in the Slavic languages – namely cognates from Serbo-Croatian novost (from nov, "new"), Czech and Slovak noviny (from nový, "new"), the Polish nowiny (pronounced noviney), the Bulgarian novini and Russian novosti – and likewise in the Celtic languages: the Welsh newyddion (from newydd) and the Cornish nowodhow (from nowydh).[1][2]

Jessica Garretson Finch is credited with coining the phrase "current events" while teaching at Barnard College in the 1890s.[3]

Newness

[edit]

As its name implies, "news" typically connotes the presentation of new information.[4][5] The newness of news gives it an uncertain quality which distinguishes it from the more careful investigations of history or other scholarly disciplines.[5][6][7] Whereas historians tend to view events as causally related manifestations of underlying processes, news stories tend to describe events in isolation, and to exclude discussion of the relationships between them.[8] News conspicuously describes the world in the present or immediate past, even when the most important aspects of a news story have occurred long in the past—or are expected to occur in the future. To make the news, an ongoing process must have some "peg", an event in time that anchors it to the present moment.[8][9] Relatedly, news often addresses aspects of reality which seem unusual, deviant, or out of the ordinary.[10] Hence the famous dictum that "Dog Bites Man" is not news, but "Man Bites Dog" is.[11]

Another corollary of the newness of news is that, as new technology enables new media to disseminate news more quickly, 'slower' forms of communication may move away from 'news' towards 'analysis'.[12]

Commodity

[edit]

According to some theories, "news" is whatever the news industry sells.[13] Journalism, broadly understood along the same lines, is the act or occupation of collecting and providing news.[14][15] From a commercial perspective, news is simply one input, along with paper (or an electronic server) necessary to prepare a final product for distribution.[16] A news agency supplies this resource "wholesale" and publishers enhance it for retail.[17][18]

Tone

[edit]

Most purveyors of news value impartiality, neutrality, and objectivity, despite the inherent difficulty of reporting without political bias.[19] Perception of these values has changed greatly over time as sensationalized 'tabloid journalism' has risen in popularity. Michael Schudson has argued that before the era of World War I and the concomitant rise of propaganda, journalists were not aware of the concept of bias in reporting, let alone actively correcting for it.[20] News is also sometimes said to portray the truth, but this relationship is elusive and qualified.[21]

Paradoxically, another property commonly attributed to news is sensationalism, the disproportionate focus on, and exaggeration of, emotive stories for public consumption.[22][23] This news is also not unrelated to gossip, the human practice of sharing information about other humans of mutual interest.[24] A common sensational topic is violence; hence another news dictum, "if it bleeds, it leads".[25]

Newsworthiness

[edit]

Newsworthiness is defined as a subject having sufficient relevance to the public or a special audience to warrant press attention or coverage.[26]

News values seem to be common across cultures. People seem to be interested in news to the extent which it has a big impact, describes conflicts, happens nearby, involves well-known people, and deviates from the norms of everyday happenings.[27] War is a common news topic, partly because it involves unknown events that could pose personal danger.[28]

History

[edit]

Folk news

[edit]

Evidence suggests that cultures around the world have found a place for people to share stories about interesting new information. Among Zulus, Mongolians, Polynesians, and American Southerners, anthropologists have documented the practice of questioning travelers for news as a matter of priority.[29] Sufficiently important news would be repeated quickly and often, and could spread by word of mouth over a large geographic area.[30] Even as printing presses came into use in Europe, news for the general public often travelled orally via monks, travelers, town criers, etc.[31]

The news is also transmitted in public gathering places, such as the Greek forum and the Roman baths. Starting in England, coffeehouses served as important sites for the spread of news, even after telecommunications became widely available. The history of the coffee houses is traced from Arab countries, which was introduced in England in the 16th century.[32] In the Muslim world, people have gathered and exchanged news at mosques and other social places. Travelers on pilgrimages to Mecca traditionally stay at caravanserais, roadside inns, along the way, and these places have naturally served as hubs for gaining news of the world.[33] In late medieval Britain, reports ("tidings") of major events were a topic of great public interest, as chronicled in Chaucer's 1380 The House of Fame and other works.[34]

Government proclamations

[edit]
Woodcut by Tommaso Garzoni depicting a town crier with a trumpet

Before the invention of newspapers in the early 17th century, official government bulletins and edicts were circulated at times in some centralized empires.[35] The first documented use of an organized courier service for the diffusion of written documents is in Egypt, where Pharaohs used couriers for the diffusion of their decrees in the territory of the State (2400 BC).[36] Julius Caesar regularly publicized his heroic deeds in Gaul, and upon becoming dictator of Rome began publishing government announcements called Acta Diurna. These were carved in metal or stone and posted in public places.[37][38] In medieval England, parliamentary declarations were delivered to sheriffs for public display and reading at the market.[39]

Specially sanctioned messengers have been recognized in Vietnamese culture, among the Khasi people in India, and in the Fox and Winnebago cultures of the American mid west. The Zulu Kingdom used runners to quickly disseminate news. In West Africa, news can be spread by griots. In most cases, the official spreaders of news have been closely aligned with holders of political power.[40]

Town criers were a common means of conveying information to city dwellers. In thirteenth-century Florence, criers known as banditori arrived in the market regularly, to announce political news, to convoke public meetings, and to call the populace to arms. In 1307 and 1322–1325, laws were established governing their appointment, conduct, and salary. These laws stipulated how many times a banditoro was to repeat a proclamation (forty) and where in the city they were to read them.[41] Different declarations sometimes came with additional protocols; announcements regarding the plague were also to be read at the city gates.[42] These proclamations all used a standard format, beginning with an exordium—"The worshipful and most esteemed gentlemen of the Eight of Ward and Security of the city of Florence make it known, notify, and expressly command, to whosoever, of whatever status, rank, quality and condition"—and continuing with a statement (narratio), a request made upon the listeners (petitio), and the penalty to be exacted from those who would not comply (peroratio).[43] In addition to major declarations, bandi (announcements) might concern petty crimes, requests for information, and notices about missing slaves.[44] Niccolò Machiavelli was captured by the Medicis in 1513, following a bando calling for his immediate surrender.[45] Some town criers could be paid to include advertising along with news.[46]

Under the Ottoman Empire, official messages were regularly distributed at mosques, by traveling holy men, and by secular criers. These criers were sent to read official announcements in marketplaces, highways, and other well-traveled places, sometimes issuing commands and penalties for disobedience.[47]

Early news networks

[edit]

The spread of news has always been linked to the communications networks in place to disseminate it. Thus, political, religious, and commercial interests have historically controlled, expanded, and monitored communications channels by which news could spread. Postal services have long been closely entwined with the maintenance of political power in a large area.[48][49]

One of the imperial communication channels, called the "Royal Road" traversed the Assyrian Empire and served as a key source of its power.[50] The Roman Empire maintained a vast network of roads, known as cursus publicus, for similar purposes.[51]

Visible chains of long-distance signaling, known as optical telegraphy, have also been used throughout history to convey limited types of information. These can have ranged from smoke and fire signals to advanced systems using semaphore codes and telescopes.[52][53] The latter form of optical telegraph came into use in Japan, Britain, France, and Germany from the 1790s through the 1850s.[54][55]

Asia

[edit]
Reproduction of Kaiyuan Za Bao court newspaper from the Tang dynasty

The world's first written news may have originated in eighth century BCE China, where reports gathered by officials were eventually compiled as the Spring and Autumn Annals. The annals, whose compilation is attributed to Confucius, were available to a sizeable reading public and dealt with common news themes—though they straddle the line between news and history.[56] The Han dynasty is credited with developing one of the most effective imperial surveillance and communications networks in the ancient world.[57] Government-produced news sheets, called tipao, circulated among court officials during the late Han dynasty (second and third centuries AD). Between 713 and 734, the Kaiyuan Za Bao ("Bulletin of the Court") of the Chinese Tang dynasty published government news; it was handwritten on silk and read by government officials.[58] The court created a Bureau of Official Reports (Jin Zhouyuan) to centralize news distribution for the court.[59] Newsletters called ch'ao pao continued to be produced and gained wider public circulation in the following centuries.[60] In 1582 there was the first reference to privately published newssheets in Beijing, during the late Ming dynasty.[61][62]

Japan had effective communications and postal delivery networks at several points in its history, first in 646 with the Taika Reform and again during the Kamakura period from 1183 to 1333. The system depended on hikyaku, runners, and regularly spaced relay stations. By this method, news could travel between Kyoto and Kamakura in 5–7 days. Special horse-mounted messengers could move information at the speed of 170 kilometers per day.[55][63] The Japanese shogunates were less tolerant than the Chinese government of news circulation.[58] The postal system established during the Edo period was even more effective, with average speeds of 125–150 km/day and express speed of 200 km/day. This system was initially used only by the government, taking private communications only at exorbitant prices. Private services emerged and in 1668 established their own nakama (guild). They became even faster, and created an effective optical telegraphy system using flags by day and lanterns and mirrors by night.[55]

Europe

[edit]

In Europe, during the Middle Ages, elites relied on runners to transmit news over long distances. At 33 kilometres per day, a runner would take two months to bring a message across the Hanseatic League from Bruges to Riga.[64][65] In the early modern period, increased cross-border interaction created a rising need for information which was met by concise handwritten newssheets. The driving force of this new development was the commercial advantage provided by up-to-date news.[7][66]

In 1556, the government of Venice first published the monthly Notizie scritte, which cost one gazetta.[67] These avvisi were handwritten newsletters and used to convey political, military, and economic news quickly and efficiently to Italian cities (1500–1700)—sharing some characteristics of newspapers though usually not considered true newspapers.[68] Avvisi were sold by subscription under the auspices of military, religious, and banking authorities. Sponsorship flavored the contents of each series, which were circulated under many different names. Subscribers included clerics, diplomatic staff, and noble families. By the last quarter of the seventeenth century, long passages from avvisi were finding their way into published monthlies such as the Mercure de France and, in northern Italy, Pallade veneta.[69][70][71]

Some European postal routes in 1563

Postal services enabled merchants and monarchs to stay abreast of important information. For the Holy Roman Empire, Emperor Maximillian I in 1490 authorized two brothers from the Italian Tasso family, Francesco and Janetto, to create a network of courier stations linked by riders. They began with a communications line between Innsbruck and Mechelen and grew from there.[72] In 1505 this network expanded to Spain, new governed by Maximilian's son Philip. These riders could travel 180 kilometers in a day.[73] This system became the Imperial Reichspost, administered by Tasso descendants (subsequently known as Thurn-und-Taxis), who in 1587 received exclusive operating rights from the Emperor.[72] The French postal service and English postal service also began at this time, but did not become comprehensive until the early 1600s.[72][74][75] In 1620, the English system linked with Thurn-und-Taxis.[53]

These connections underpinned an extensive system of news circulation, with handwritten items bearing dates and places of origin. Centred in Germany, the network took in news from Russia, the Balkans, Italy, Britain, France, and the Netherlands.[76] The German lawyer Christoph von Scheurl and the Fugger house of Augsburg were prominent hubs in this network.[77] Letters describing historically significant events could gain wide circulation as news reports. Indeed, personal correspondence sometimes acted only as a convenient channel through which news could flow across a larger network.[78] A common type of business communication was a simple listing of current prices, the circulation of which quickened the flow of international trade.[79][80] Businesspeople also wanted to know about events related to shipping, the affairs of other businesses, and political developments.[79] Even after the advent of international newspapers, business owners still valued correspondence highly as a source of reliable news that would affect their enterprise.[81] Handwritten newsletters, which could be produced quickly for a limited clientele, also continued into the 1600s.[77]

Rise of the newspaper

[edit]
The London Gazette, "Published By Authority" (of the Stationers' Company) on 3 December 1909

The spread of paper and the printing press from China to Europe preceded a major advance in the transmission of news.[82] With the spread of printing presses and the creation of new markets in the 1500s, news underwent a shift from factual and precise economic reporting, to a more emotive and freewheeling format. (Private newsletters containing important intelligence therefore remained in use by people who needed to know.)[83] The first newspapers emerged in Germany in the early 1600s.[84] Relation aller Fürnemmen und gedenckwürdigen Historien, from 1605, is recognized as the world's first formalized 'newspaper';[85] while not a 'newspaper' in the modern sense, the Ancient Roman Acta Diurna served a similar purpose circa 131 BC.[citation needed]

The new format, which mashed together numerous unrelated and perhaps dubious reports from far-flung locations, created a radically new and jarring experience for its readers.[86] A variety of styles emerged, from single-story tales, to compilations, overviews, and personal and impersonal types of news analysis.[87]

News for public consumption was at first tightly controlled by governments. By 1530, England had created a licensing system for the press and banned "seditious opinions".[88] Under the Licensing Act, publication was restricted to approved presses—as exemplified by The London Gazette, which prominently bore the words: "Published By Authority".[89] Parliament allowed the Licensing Act to lapse in 1695, beginning a new era marked by Whig and Tory newspapers.[90] (During this era, the Stamp Act limited newspaper distribution simply by making them expensive to sell and buy.) In France, censorship was even more constant.[91] Consequently, many Europeans read newspapers originating from beyond their national borders—especially from the Dutch Republic, where publishers could evade state censorship.[92]

The new United States saw a newspaper boom beginning with the Revolutionary era, accelerated by spirited debates over the establishment of a new government, spurred on by subsidies contained in the 1792 Postal Service Act, and continuing into the 1800s.[93][94] American newspapers got many of their stories by copying reports from each other. Thus by offering free postage to newspapers wishing to exchange copies, the Postal Service Act subsidized a rapidly growing news network through which different stories could percolate.[95] Newspapers thrived during the colonization of the West, fueled by high literacy and a newspaper-loving culture.[96] By 1880, San Francisco rivaled New York in number of different newspapers and in printed newspaper copies per capita.[97] Boosters of new towns felt that newspapers covering local events brought legitimacy, recognition, and community.[98] The 1830s American, wrote Alexis de Tocqueville, was "a very civilized man prepared for a time to face life in the forest, plunging into the wilderness of the New World with his Bible, ax, and newspapers."[99] In France, the Revolution brought forth an abundance of newspapers and a new climate of press freedom, followed by a return to repression under Napoleon.[100] In 1792 the Revolutionaries set up a news ministry called the Bureau d'Esprit.[101]

Some newspapers published in the 1800s and after retained the commercial orientation characteristic of the private newsletters of the Renaissance. Economically oriented newspapers published new types of data enabled the advent of statistics, especially economic statistics which could inform sophisticated investment decisions.[102] These newspapers, too, became available for larger sections of society, not just elites, keen on investing some of their savings in the stock markets. Yet, as in the case other newspapers, the incorporation of advertising into the newspaper led to justified reservations about accepting newspaper information at face value.[103] Economic newspapers also became promoters of economic ideologies, such as Keynesianism in the mid-1900s.[104]

Newspapers came to sub-Saharan Africa via colonization. The first English-language newspaper in the area was The Royal Gazette and Sierra Leone Advertiser, established in 1801, and followed by The Royal Gold Coast Gazette and Commercial Intelligencer in 1822 and the Liberia Herald in 1826.[105] A number of nineteenth-century African newspapers were established by missionaries.[106] These newspapers by and large promoted the colonial governments and served the interests of European settlers by relaying news from Europe.[106] The first newspaper published in a native African language was the Muigwithania, published in Kikuyu by the Kenyan Central Association.[106] Muigwithania and other newspapers published by indigenous Africans took strong opposition stances, agitating strongly for African independence.[107] Newspapers were censored heavily during the colonial period—as well as after formal independence. Some liberalization and diversification took place in the 1990s.[108]

Newspapers were slow to spread to the Arab world, which had a stronger tradition of oral communication, and mistrust of the European approach to news reporting. By the end of the eighteenth century, the Ottoman Empire's leaders in Istanbul monitored the European press, but its contents were not disseminated for mass consumption.[109] Some of the first written news in modern North Africa arose in Egypt under Muhammad Ali, who developed the local paper industry and initiated the limited circulation of news bulletins called jurnals.[110] Beginning in the 1850s and 1860s, the private press began to develop in the multi-religious country of Lebanon.[111]

Newswire

[edit]

The development of the electrical telegraph, which often travelled along railroad lines, enabled news to travel faster, over longer distances.[112] (Days before Morse's Baltimore–Washington line transmitted the famous question, "What hath God wrought?", it transmitted the news that Henry Clay and Theodore Frelinghuysen had been chosen by the Whig nominating party.)[37] Telegraph networks enabled a new centralization of the news, in the hands of wire services concentrated in major cities. The modern form of these originated with Charles-Louis Havas, who founded Bureau Havas (later Agence France-Presse) in Paris. Havas began in 1832, using the French government's optical telegraph network. In 1840 he began using pigeons for communications to Paris, London, and Brussels. Havas began to use the electric telegraph when it became available.[113]

One of Havas's proteges, Bernhard Wolff, founded Wolffs Telegraphisches Bureau in Berlin in 1849.[114] Another Havas disciple, Paul Reuter, began collecting news from Germany and France in 1849, and in 1851 immigrated to London, where he established the Reuters news agency—specializing in news from the continent.[115] In 1863, William Saunders and Edward Spender formed the Central Press agency, later called the Press Association, to handle domestic news.[116] Just before insulated telegraph line crossed the English Channel in 1851, Reuter won the right to transmit stock exchange prices between Paris and London.[117] He maneuvered Reuters into a dominant global position with the motto "Follow the Cable", setting up news outposts across the British Empire in Alexandria (1865), Bombay (1866), Melbourne (1874), Sydney (1874), and Cape Town (1876).[117][118] In the United States, the Associated Press became a news powerhouse, gaining a lead position through an exclusive arrangement with the Western Union company.[119]

The telegraph ushered in a new global communications regime, accompanied by a restructuring of the national postal systems, and closely followed by the advent of telephone lines. With the value of international news at a premium, governments, businesses, and news agencies moved aggressively to reduce transmission times. In 1865, Reuters had the scoop on the Lincoln assassination, reporting the news in England twelve days after the event took place.[120] In 1866, an undersea telegraph cable successfully connected Ireland to Newfoundland (and thus the Western Union network) cutting trans-Atlantic transmission time from days to hours.[121][122][123] The transatlantic cable allowed fast exchange of information about the London and New York stock exchanges, as well as the New York, Chicago, and Liverpool commodity exchanges—for the price of $5–10, in gold, per word.[124] Transmitting On 11 May 1857, a young British telegraph operator in Delhi signaled home to alert the authorities of the Indian Rebellion of 1857. The rebels proceeded to disrupt the British telegraph network, which was rebuilt with more redundancies.[125] In 1902–1903, Britain and the U.S. completed the circumtelegraphy of the planet with transpacific cables from Canada to Fiji and New Zealand (British Empire), and from the US to Hawaii and the occupied Philippines.[126] U.S. reassertions of the Monroe Doctrine notwithstanding, Latin America was a battleground of competing telegraphic interests until World War I, after which U.S. interests finally did consolidate their power in the hemisphere.[127]

World railway and telegraph system, 1900

By the turn of the century (i.e., c. 1900), Wolff, Havas, and Reuters formed a news cartel, dividing up the global market into three sections, in which each had more-or-less exclusive distribution rights and relationships with national agencies.[128] Each agency's area corresponded roughly to the colonial sphere of its mother country.[129] Reuters and the Australian national news service had an agreement to exchange news only with each other.[130] Due to the high cost of maintaining infrastructure, political goodwill, and global reach, newcomers found it virtually impossible to challenge the big three European agencies or the American Associated Press.[131] In 1890 Reuters (in partnership with the Press Association, England's major news agency for domestic stories) expanded into "soft" news stories for public consumption, about topics such as sports and "human interest".[132] In 1904, the big three wire services opened relations with Vestnik, the news agency of Czarist Russia, to their group, though they maintained their own reporters in Moscow.[133] During and after the Russian Revolution, the outside agencies maintained a working relationship with the Petrograd Telegraph Agency, renamed the Russian Telegraph Agency (ROSTA) and eventually the Telegraph Agency of the Soviet Union (TASS).[134]

The Chinese Communist Party created its news agency, the Red China News Agency, in 1931; its primary responsibilities were the Red China newspaper and the internal Reference News. In 1937, the Party renamed it Xinhua News Agency, which became the official news agency of the People's Republic of China in 1949.[135]

These agencies touted their ability to distill events into "minute globules of news", 20–30 word summaries which conveyed the essence of new developments.[134] Unlike newspapers, and contrary to the sentiments of some of their reporters, the agencies sought to keep their reports simple and factual.[136] The wire services brought forth the "inverted pyramid" model of news copy, in which key facts appear at the start of the text, and more and more details are included as it goes along.[121] The sparse telegraphic writing style spilled over into newspapers, which often reprinted stories from the wire with little embellishment.[18][137] In a 20 September 1918 Pravda editorial, Lenin instructed the Soviet press to cut back on their political rambling and produce many short anticapitalist news items in "telegraph style".[138]

As in previous eras, the news agencies provided special services to political and business clients, and these services constituted a significant portion of their operations and income. The wire services maintained close relationships with their respective national governments, which provided both press releases and payments.[139] The acceleration and centralization of economic news facilitated regional economic integration and economic globalization. "It was the decrease in information costs and the increasing communication speed that stood at the roots of increased market integration, rather than falling transport costs by itself. In order to send goods to another area, merchants needed to know first whether in fact to send off the goods and to what place. Information costs and speed were essential for these decisions."[140]

Radio and television

[edit]

The British Broadcasting Company began transmitting radio news from London in 1922, dependent entirely, by law, on the British news agencies.[141] BBC radio marketed itself as a news by and for social elites, and hired only broadcasters who spoke with upper-class accents.[142] The BBC gained importance in the May 1926 general strike, during which newspapers were closed and the radio served as the only source of news for an uncertain public. (To the displeasure of many listeners, the BBC took an unambiguously pro-government stance against the strikers).[141][143]

In the US, RCA's Radio Group established its radio network, NBC, in 1926. The Paley family founded CBS soon after. These two networks, which supplied news broadcasts to subsidiaries and affiliates, dominated the airwaves throughout the period of radio's hegemony as a news source.[144] Radio broadcasters in the United States negotiated a similar arrangement with the press in 1933, when they agreed to use only news from the Press–Radio Bureau and eschew advertising; this agreement soon collapsed and radio stations began reporting their own news (with advertising).[145] As in Britain, American news radio avoided "controversial" topics as per norms established by the National Association of Broadcasters.[146] By 1939, 58% of Americans surveyed by Fortune considered radio news more accurate than newspapers, and 70% chose radio as their main news source.[146] Radio expanded rapidly across the continent, from 30 stations in 1920 to a thousand in the 1930s. This operation was financed mostly with advertising and public relations money.[147]

The Soviet Union began a major international broadcasting operation in 1929, with stations in German, English and French. The Nazi Party made use of the radio in its rise to power in Germany, with much of its propaganda focused on attacking the Soviet Bolsheviks. The British and Italian foreign radio services competed for influence in North Africa. All four of these broadcast services grew increasingly vitriolic as the European nations prepared for war.[148]

The war provided an opportunity to expand radio and take advantage of its new potential. The BBC reported on Allied invasion of Normandy on 8:00 a.m. of the morning it took place, and including a clip from German radio coverage of the same event. Listeners followed along with developments throughout the day.[149] The U.S. set up its Office of War Information which by 1942 sent programming across South America, the Middle East, and East Asia.[150] Radio Luxembourg, a centrally located high-power station on the continent, was seized by Germany, and then by the United States—which created fake news programs appearing as though they were created by Germany.[151] Targeting American troops in the Pacific, the Japanese government broadcast the "Zero Hour" program, which included news from the U.S. to make the soldiers homesick.[152] But by the end of the war, Britain had the largest radio network in the world, broadcasting internationally in 43 different languages.[153] Its scope would eventually be surpassed (by 1955) by the worldwide Voice of America programs, produced by the United States Information Agency.[154]

In Britain and the United States, television news watching rose dramatically in the 1950s and by the 1960s supplanted radio as the public's primary source of news.[155] In the U.S., television was run by the same networks which owned radio: CBS, NBC, and an NBC spin-off called ABC.[156] Edward R. Murrow, who first entered the public ear as a war reporter in London, made the big leap to television to become an iconic newsman on CBS (and later the director of the United States Information Agency).[157]

Ted Turner's creation of the Cable News Network (CNN) in 1980 inaugurated a new era of 24-hour satellite news broadcasting. In 1991, the BBC introduced a competitor, BBC World Service Television. Rupert Murdoch's Australian News Corporation entered the picture with Fox News Channel in the US, Sky News in Britain, and STAR TV in Asia.[158] Combining this new apparatus with the use of embedded reporters, the United States waged the 1991–1992 Gulf War with the assistance of nonstop media coverage.[159] CNN's specialty is the crisis, to which the network is prepared to shift its total attention if so chosen.[160] CNN news was transmitted via Intelsat communications satellites.[161] CNN, said an executive, would bring a "town crier to the global village".[162]

In 1996, the Qatar-owned broadcaster Al Jazeera emerged as a powerful alternative to the Western media, capitalizing in part on anger in the Arab & Muslim world regarding biased coverage of the Gulf War. Al Jazeera hired many news workers conveniently laid off by BBC Arabic Television, which closed in April 1996. It used Arabsat to broadcast.[158]

Internet

[edit]

The early internet, known as ARPANET, was controlled by the U.S. Department of Defense and used mostly by academics. It became available to a wider public with the release of the Netscape browser in 1994.[163] At first, news websites were mostly archives of print publications.[164] An early online newspaper was the Electronic Telegraph, published by The Daily Telegraph.[165][166] A 1994 earthquake in California was one of the first big stories to be reported online in real time.[167] The new availability of web browsing made news sites accessible to more people.[167] On the day of the Oklahoma City bombing in April 1995, people flocked to newsgroups and chatrooms to discuss the situation and share information. The Oklahoma City Daily posted news to its site within hours. Two of the only news sites capable of hosting images, the San Jose Mercury News and Time magazine, posted photographs of the scene.[167]

Quantitatively, the internet has massively expanded the sheer volume of news items available to one person. The speed of news flow to individuals has also reached a new plateau.[168] This insurmountable flow of news can daunt people and cause information overload. Zbigniew Brzezinski called this period the "technetronic era", in which "global reality increasingly absorbs the individual, involves him, and even occasionally overwhelms him."[169]

In cases of government crackdowns or revolutions, the Internet has often become a major communication channel for news propagation; while shutting down a newspaper, radio or television station is (relatively) simple, mobile devices such as smartphones and netbooks are much harder to detect and confiscate. The propagation of internet-capable mobile devices has also given rise to the citizen journalist, who provide an additional perspective on unfolding events.

News media today

[edit]

News can travel through different communication media.[17] In modern times, printed news had to be phoned into a newsroom or brought there by a reporter, where it was typed and either transmitted over wire services or edited and manually set in type along with other news stories for a specific edition. Today, the term "breaking news" has become trite as commercial broadcasting United States cable news services that are available 24 hours a day use live communications satellite technology to bring current events into consumers' homes as the event occurs. Events that used to take hours or days to become common knowledge in towns or in nations are fed instantaneously to consumers via radio, television, mobile phone, and the internet.

Speed of news transmission varies wildly on the basis of where and how one lives.[170]

Newspaper

[edit]
A newspaper is one of the most common ways to receive the latest news.

Most large cities in the United States historically had morning and afternoon newspapers. With the addition of new communications media, afternoon newspapers have shut down and morning newspapers have lost circulation. Weekly newspapers have somewhat increased.[171] In more and more cities, newspapers have established local market monopolies—i.e., a single newspaper is the only one in town. This process has accelerated since the 1980s, commensurate with a general trend of consolidation in media ownership.[172] In China, too, newspapers have gained exclusive status, city-by-city, and pooled into large associations such as Chengdu Business News. These associations function like news agencies, challenging the hegemony of Xinhua as a news provider.[135]

The world's top three most circulated newspapers all publish from India.

About one-third of newspaper revenue comes from sales; the majority comes from advertising.[173] Newspapers have struggled to maintain revenue given declining circulation and the free flow of information over the internet; some have implemented paywalls for their websites.[165]

In the U.S., many newspapers have shifted their operations online, publishing around the clock rather than daily in order to keep pace with the internet society. Prognosticators have suggested that print newspapers will vanish from the U.S. in 5–20 years.[165] Many newspapers have started to track social media engagement for trending news stories to cover.

Television

[edit]

Internationally distributed news channels include BBC News, CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, CBC News Network, and Sky News. Televisions are densely concentrated in the United States (98% of households), and the average American watches 4 hours of television programs each day. In other parts of the world, such as Kenya—especially rural areas without much electricity—televisions are rare.[170]

The largest supplier of international video news is Reuters TV, with 409 subscribers in 83 countries, 38 bureaus, and a reported audience of 1.5 billion people each day. The other major video news service is Associated Press Television News. These two major agencies have agreements to exchange video news with ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, and Eurovision—itself a sizeable video news exchange.[174] CNN International is a notable broadcaster in times of crisis.[160]

Internet

[edit]

Online journalism is news that is reported on the internet. News can be delivered more quickly through this method of news as well as accessed more easily. The internet era has transformed the understanding of news. Because the internet allows communication which is not only instantaneous, but also bi- or multi-directional, it has blurred the boundaries of who is a legitimate news producer. A common type of internet journalism is called blogging, which is a service of persistently written articles uploaded and written by one or more individuals. Millions of people in countries such as the United States and South Korea have taken up blogging. Many blogs have rather small audiences; some blogs are read by millions each month.[175] Social media sites, especially Twitter and Facebook, have become an important source of breaking news information and for disseminating links to news websites. Twitter declared in 2012: "It's like being delivered a newspaper whose headlines you'll always find interesting—you can discover news as it's happening, learn more about topics that are important to you, and get the inside scoop in real time."[176] Cell phone cameras have normalized citizen photojournalism.[177]

Michael Schudson, professor at the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism, has said that "[e]verything we thought we once knew about journalism needs to be rethought in the Digital Age."[178] Today the work of journalism can be done from anywhere and done well. It requires no more than a reporter and a laptop. In that way, journalistic authority seems to have become more individual- and less institution-based. But does the individual reporter always have to be an actual journalist? Or can journalistic work be done from anywhere and by anyone? These are questions that refer to the core of journalistic practice and the definition of "news" itself. As Schudson has given emphasis to, the answer is not easily found; "the ground journalists walk upon is shaking, and the experience for both those who work in the field and those on the outside studying it is dizzying".[178]

Schudson has identified the following six specific areas where the ecology of news in his opinion has changed:

  • The line between the reader and writer has blurred.
  • The distinction among tweet, blog post, Facebook, newspaper story, magazine article, and book has blurred.
  • The line between professionals and amateurs has blurred, and a variety of "pro-am" relationships has emerged.
  • The boundaries delineating for-profit, public, and non-profit media have blurred, and the cooperation across these models of financing has developed.
  • Within commercial news organizations, the line between the news room and the business office has blurred.
  • The line between old media and new media has blurred, practically beyond recognition.[179]

These alterations inevitably have fundamental ramifications for the contemporary ecology of news. "The boundaries of journalism, which just a few years ago seemed relatively clear, and permanent, have become less distinct, and this blurring, while potentially the foundation of progress even as it is the source of risk, has given rise to a new set of journalistic principles and practices",[180] Schudson puts it. It is indeed complex, but it seems to be the future.

Online news has also changed the geographic reach of individual news stories, diffusing readership from city-by-city markets to a potentially global audience.[165]

The growth of social media networks have also created new opportunities for automated and efficient news gathering for journalists and newsrooms. Many newsrooms (broadcasters, newspapers, magazines, radio and TV) have started to perform news gathering on social media platforms. Social media is creating changes in the consumer behaviour and news consumption. According to a study by Pew Research, a large portion of Americans read news on digital and on mobile devices.

Because internet does not have the "column inches" limitation of print media, online news stories can, but don't always, come bundled with supplementary material. The medium of the World Wide Web also enables hyperlinking, which allows readers to navigate to other pages related to the one they're reading.[165]

Despite these changes, some studies have concluded that internet news coverage remains fairly homogenous and dominated by news agencies.[181][182] And journalists working with online media do not identify significantly different criteria for newsworthiness than print journalists.[23]

News agencies

[edit]
Reuters office in Bonn, Germany, 1988

News agencies are services which compile news and disseminate it in bulk. Because they disseminate information to a wide variety of clients, who repackage the material as news for public consumption, news agencies tend to use less controversial language in their reports. Despite their importance, news agencies are not well known by the general public. They keep low profiles and their reporters usually do not get bylines.[18][183]

The oldest news agency still operating is the Agence France-Presse (AFP).[184] It was founded in 1835 by a Parisian translator and advertising agent, Charles-Louis Havas as Agence Havas. By the end of the twentieth century, Reuters far outpaced the other news agencies in profits, and became one of the largest companies in Europe.[185] In 2011, Thomson Reuters employed more than 55,000 people in 100 countries, and posted an annual revenue of $12.9 billion.[18]

United Press International gained prominence as a world news agency in the middle of the twentieth century, but shrank in the 1980s and was sold off at low prices. It is owned by the Unification Church company News World Communications.

News agencies, especially Reuters and the newly important Bloomberg News, convey both news stories for mass audiences and financial information of interest to businesses and investors.[186][187] Bloomberg LP, a private company founded by Michael Bloomberg in 1981, made rapid advances with computerized stock market reporting updated in real time. Its news service continued to exploit this electronic advantage by combining computer-generated analytics with text reporting. Bloomberg linked with Agence France Presse in the 1990s.[187]

Following the marketization of the Chinese economy and the media boom of the 1990s, Xinhua has adopted some commercial practices including subscription fees, but it remains government-subsidized. It provides newswire, news photos, economic information, and audio and video news. Xinhua has a growing number of subscribers, totaling 16,969 in 2002, including 93% of Chinese newspapers.[135] It operates 123 foreign bureaus and produces 300 news stories each day.[188]

Other agencies with considerable reach include Deutsche Presse-Agentur (Germany), Kyodo News (Japan), the Agenzia Nazionale Stampa Associata (Italy), the Middle East News Agency (Egypt), Tanjug (Serbia), EFE (Spain), and Anadolu Agency (Turkey).[189]

On the internet, news aggregators play a role similar to that of the news agency—and, because of the sources they select, tend to transmit news stories which originate from the main agencies. Of articles displayed by Yahoo! News in the U.S., 91.7% come from news agencies: 39.4% from AP, 30.9% AFP, and 21.3% Reuters. In India, 60.1% of Yahoo! News stories come from Reuters. Google News relies somewhat less on news agencies, and has shown high volatility, in the sense of focusing heavily on the most recent handful of salient world events.[181] In 2010, Google News redesigned its front page with automatic geotargeting, which generated a selection of local news items for every viewer.[190]

Global news system

[edit]

In the 20th century, global news coverage was dominated by a combination of the "Big Four" news agencies—Reuters, Associated Press, Agence France Press, and United Press International—representing the Western bloc, and the Communist agencies: TASS from the Soviet Union, and Xinhua from China.[191] Studies of major world events, and analyses of all international news coverage in various newspapers, consistently found that a large majority of news items originated from the four biggest wire services.[181]

Television news agencies include Associated Press Television News, which bought and incorporated World Television News; and Reuters Television.[174][192] Bloomberg News created in the 1990s, expanded rapidly to become a player in the realm of international news.[186] The Associated Press also maintains a radio network with thousands of subscribers worldwide; it is the sole provider of international news to many small stations.[174]

By some accounts, dating back to the 1940s, the increasing interconnectedness of the news system has accelerated the pace of human history itself.[193]

New World Information and Communication Order

[edit]

The global news system is dominated by agencies from Europe and the United States, and reflects their interests and priorities in its coverage.[194] Euro-American control of the global news system has led to criticism; that events around the world are constantly compared to events like the Holocaust and World War II, which are considered foundational in the West.[195] Since the 1960s, a significant amount of news reporting from the Third World has been characterized by some form "development journalism", a paradigm which focuses on long-term development projects, social change, and nation-building.[196] When in 1987 the U.S. media reported on a riot in the Dominican Republic—the first major news item regarding that country in years—the resulting decline in tourism lasted for years and had a noticeable effect on the economy.[197] The English language predominates in global news exchanges.[198] Critics have accused the global news system of perpetuating cultural imperialism.[162][199][200] Critics further charge that the Western media conglomerates maintain a bias towards the status quo economic order, especially a pro-corporate bias.[199]

The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) has promoted a New World Information and Communication Order, which envisions an international news exchange system involving national news agencies in every country. UNESCO encouraged the new states formed from colonial territories in the 1960s to establish news agencies, to generate domestic news stories, exchange news items with international partners, and disseminate both types of news internally.[201] Along these lines, the 1980 MacBride report, "Many Voices, One World", called for an interdependent global news system with more participation from different governments. To this end, also, UNESCO formed the Non-Aligned News Agencies Pool.[202]

The Inter Press Service, founded in 1964, has served as an intermediary for Third World press agencies.[203] Inter Press Service's editorial policy favors coverage of events, institutions, and issues which relate to inequality, economic development, economic integration, natural resources, population, health, education, and sustainable development.[204] It gives less coverage than other agencies to crime, disasters, and violence. Geographically, 70% of its news reporting concerns Africa, Asia, Latin America, and the Caribbean.[205] IPS has the most subscribers in Latin America and southern Africa.[204] IPS receives grants from organizations such as the United Nations Development Program and other United Nations agencies and private foundations to report news on chosen topics, including the environment, sustainable development, and women's issues.[206]

Beginning in the 1960s, the United States Agency for International Development, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and UNESCO developed the use of satellite television for international broadcasting. In India, 1975–1976, these agencies implemented an experimental satellite television system, called the Satellite Instructional Television Experiment, with assistance from the Indian Space Research Organisation, and All India Radio.[207]

Further transformation in global news flow

[edit]

By the 1980s, much of the Third World had succumbed to a debt crisis resulting from unpayable large loans accumulated since the 1960s. At this point, the World Bank took an active role in the governance of many countries, and its authority extended to communications policy. The policy of developing Third World media gave way to a global regime of free trade institutions like the World Trade Organization, which also protected the free flow of information across borders.[208] The World Bank also promoted privatization of national telecommunications, which afforded large multinational corporations the opportunity to purchase networks and expand operations in the Third World.[209][210]

In countries with less telecommunications infrastructure, people, especially youth, tend today to get their news predominantly from mobile phones and, less so, from the internet. Older folks listen more to the radio. The government of China is a major investor in Third World telecommunications, especially in Africa.[211] Some issues relating to global information flow were revisited in light of the internet at the 2003/2005 World Summit on the Information Society, a conference which emphasized the role of civil society and the private sector in information society governance.[212]

News values

[edit]

News values are the professional norms of journalism. Commonly, news content should contain all the "Five Ws" (who, what, when, where, why, and also how) of an event. Newspapers normally place hard news stories on the first pages, so the most important information is at the beginning, enabling busy readers to read as little or as much as they desire. Local stations and networks with a set format must take news stories and break them down into the most important aspects due to time constraints.

Journalists are often expected to aim for objectivity; reporters claim to try to cover all sides of an issue without bias, as compared to commentators or analysts, who provide opinion or personal points of view. The resulting articles lay out facts in a sterile, noncommittal manner, standing back to "let the reader decide" the truth of the matter.[213] Several governments impose certain constraints against bias. In the United Kingdom, the government agency of Ofcom (Office of Communications) enforces a legal requirement of "impartiality" on news broadcasters.[214] Some governments, such as Russia, operate state-run news organizations.[215]

Although newswriters have always laid claim to truth and objectivity, the modern values of professional journalism were established beginning in the late 1800s and especially after World War I, when groups like the American Society of Newspaper Editors codified rules for unbiased news reporting. These norms held the most sway in American and British journalism, and were scorned by some other countries.[216][217] These ideas have become part of the practice of journalism across the world.[218] Soviet commentators said stories in the Western press were trivial distractions from reality, and emphasized a socialist realism model focusing on developments in everyday life.[219]

Even in those situations where objectivity is expected, it is difficult to achieve, and individual journalists may fall foul of their own personal bias, or succumb to commercial or political pressure. Similarly, the objectivity of news organizations owned by conglomerated corporations fairly may be questioned, in light of the natural incentive for such groups to report news in a manner intended to advance the conglomerate's financial interests. Individuals and organizations who are the subject of news reports may use news management techniques to try to make a favourable impression.[220] Because each individual has a particular point of view, it is recognized that there can be no absolute objectivity in news reporting.[221] Journalists can collectively shift their opinion over what is a controversy up for debate and what is an established fact, as evidenced by homogenization during the 2000s of news coverage of climate change.[222]

Some commentators on news values have argued that journalists' training in news values itself represents a systemic bias of the news. The norm of objectivity leads journalists to gravitate towards certain types of acts and exclude others. A journalist can be sure of objectivity in reporting that an official or public figure has made a certain statement. This is one reason why so much news reporting is devoted to official statements.[223] This lemma dates back to the early history of public news reporting, as exemplified by an English printer who on 12 March 1624 published news from Brussels in the form of letters, with the prefacing comment: "Now because you shall not say, that either out of my owne conceit I misliked a phrase, or presumptuously tooke upon me to reforme any thing amisse, I will truly set you downe their owne words."[224]

Feminist critiques argue that discourse defined as objective by news organizations reflects a male-centered perspective.[225] In their selection of sources, journalists rely heavily on men as sources of authoritative- and objective-seeming statements.[226] News reporting has also tended to discuss women differently, usually in terms of appearance and relationship to men.[227]

The critique of traditional norms of objectivity comes from within news organizations as well. Said Peter Horrocks, head of television news at BBC: "The days of middle-of-the-road, balancing Left and Right, impartiality are dead. […] we need to consider adopting what I like to think of as a much wider 'radical impartiality'—the need to hear the widest range of views—all sides of the story."[214]

Social organization of news production

[edit]

News organizations

[edit]

Viewed from a sociological perspective, news for mass consumption is produced in hierarchical organizations. Reporters, working near the bottom of the structure, are given significant autonomy in researching and preparing reports, subject to assignments and occasional intervention from higher decision-makers.[228] Owners at the top of the news hierarchy influence the content of news indirectly but substantially. The professional norms of journalism discourage overt censorship; however, news organizations have covert but firm norms about how to cover certain topics. These policies are conveyed to journalists through socialization on the job; without any written policy, they simply learn how things are done.[229][230] Journalists comply with these rules for various reasons, including job security.[231] Journalists are also systematically influenced by their education, including journalism school.[232]

News production is routinized in several ways. News stories use familiar formats and subgenres which vary by topic. "Rituals of objectivity", such as pairing a quotation from one group with a quotation from a competing group, dictate the construction of most news narratives. Many news items revolve around periodic press conferences or other scheduled events. Further routine is established by assigning each journalist to a beat: a domain of human affairs, usually involving government or commerce, in which certain types of events routinely occur.[233]

A common scholarly frame for understanding news production is to examine the role of information gatekeepers: to ask why and how certain narratives make their way from news producers to news consumers.[234] Obvious gatekeepers include journalists, news agency staff, and wire editors of newspapers.[235] Ideology, personal preferences, source of news, and length of a story are among the many considerations which influence gatekeepers.[236] Although social media have changed the structure of news dissemination, gatekeeper effects may continue due to the role of a few central nodes in the social network.[237]

New factors have emerged in internet-era newsrooms. One issue is "click-thinking", the editorial selection of news stories—and of journalists—who can generate the most website hits and thus advertising revenue. Unlike a newspaper, a news website has detailed data collection about which stories are popular and who is reading them.[183][238] The drive for speedy online postings, some journalists have acknowledged, has altered norms of fact-checking so that verification takes place after publication.[183][239]

Journalists' sometimes unattributed echoing of other news sources can also increase the homogeneity of news feeds.[240] The digital age can accelerate the problem of circular reporting: propagation of the same error through increasingly reliable sources. In 2009, a number of journalists were embarrassed after all reproducing a fictional quotation, originating from Wikipedia.[240][241]

News organizations have historically been male-dominated, though women have acted as journalists since at least the 1880s. The number of female journalists has increased over time, but organizational hierarchies remain controlled mostly by men.[242] Studies of British news organizations estimate that more than 80% of decision-makers are men.[243] Similar studies have found 'old boys' networks' in control of news organizations in the United States and the Netherlands.[244] Further, newsrooms tend to divide journalists by gender, assigning men to "hard" topics like military, crime, and economics, and women to "soft", "humanised" topics.[245]

Relationship with institutions

[edit]

For various reasons, news media usually have a close relationship with the state, and often church as well, even when they cast themselves in critical roles.[48][49][246] This relationship seems to emerge because the press can develop symbiotic relationships with other powerful social institutions.[246] In the United States, the Associated Press wire service developed a "bilateral monopoly" with the Western Union telegraph company.[119][247]

The news agencies which rose to power in the mid-1800s all had support from their respective governments, and in turn served their political interests to some degree.[139] News for consumption has operated under statist assumptions, even when it takes a stance adversarial to some aspect of a government.[248] In practice, a large proportion of routine news production involves interactions between reporters and government officials.[249] Relatedly, journalists tend to adopt a hierarchical view of society, according to which a few people at the top of organizational pyramids are best situated to comment on the reality which serves as the basis of news.[250] Broadly speaking, therefore, news tends to normalize and reflect the interests of the power structure dominant in its social context.[251]

Today, international non-governmental organizations (NGOs) rival and may surpass governments in their influence on the content of news.[252]

State control

[edit]

Governments use international news transmissions to promote the national interest and conduct political warfare, alternatively known as public diplomacy and, in the modern era, international broadcasting. International radio broadcasting came into wide-ranging use by world powers seeking cultural integration of their empires.[253] The British government used BBC radio as a diplomatic tool, setting up Arabic, Spanish and Portuguese services in 1937.[254] American propaganda broadcasters include Voice of America and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, set up during the Cold War and still operating today.[255] The United States remains the world's top broadcaster, although by some accounts it was surpassed for a time c. 1980 by the Soviet Union. Other major international broadcasters include the People's Republic of China, Taiwan, Germany, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, North Korea, India, Cuba, and Australia.[256] Around the world (and especially, formerly, in the Soviet bloc), international news sources such as the BBC World Service are often welcomed as alternatives to domestic state-run media.[257][258]

Governments have also funneled programming through private news organizations, as when the British government arranged to insert news into the Reuters feed during and after World War Two.[259] Past revelations have suggested that the U.S. military and intelligence agencies create news stories which they disseminate secretly into the foreign and domestic media. Investigation into the Central Intelligence Agency pursued in the 1970s found that it owned hundreds of news organizations (wire services, newspapers, magazines) outright.[260][261] Soviet news warfare also involved the creation of front groups, like the International Organization of Journalists. The Russian KGB heavily pursued a strategy of disinformation, planting false stories which made their way to news outlets worldwide.[262]

Broadcasts into Iraq before the Second Gulf War mimicked the style of local programming.[263] The US also launched Middle East Broadcasting Networks, featuring the satellite TV station Alhurra and radio station Radio Sawa to beam 24-hour programming to Iraq and environs.[264]

Today, Al Jazeera, a TV and internet news network owned by the government of Qatar, has become one of the foremost news sources in the world, appreciated by millions as an alternative to the Western media.[265] State-owned China Central Television operates 18 channels and reaches more than a billion viewers worldwide.[266] Iran's Press TV and Russia's Russia Today, branded as RT, also have multiplatform presences and large audiences.

Public relations

[edit]

If important things of life to-day consist of trans-atlantic radiophone talks arranged by commercial telephone companies; if they consist of inventions that will be commercially advantageous to the men who market them; if they consist of Henry Fords with epoch-making cars—then all this is news.

Edward Bernays, Propaganda (1928), pp. 152–153.

As distinct from advertising, which deals with marketing distinct from news, public relations involves the techniques of influencing news in order to give a certain impression to the public. A standard public relations tactic, the "third-party technique", is the creation of seemingly independent organizations, which can deliver objective-sounding statements to news organizations without revealing their corporate connections.[267] Public relations agencies can create complete content packages, such as Video News Releases, which are rebroadcast as news without commentary or detail about their origin.[268] Video news releases seem like normal news programming, but use subtle product placement and other techniques to influence viewers.[269]

Public relations releases offer valuable newsworthy information to increasingly overworked journalists on deadline.[240] (This pre-organized news content has been called an information subsidy.)[270] The journalist relies on appearances of autonomy and even opposition to established interests—but the public relations agent seek to conceal their client's influence on the news,. Thus, public relations works its magic in secret.[252][271]

Public relations can dovetail with state objectives, as in the case of the 1990 news story about Iraqi soldiers taking "babies out of incubators" in Kuwaiti hospitals.[272] During the Nigerian Civil War, both the federal government and the secessionist Republic of Biafra hired public relations firms, which competed to influence public opinion in the West, and between them established some of the key narratives employed in news reports about the war.[273]

Overall, the position of the public relations industry has grown stronger, while the position of news producers has grown weaker. Public relations agents mediate the production of news about all sectors of society.[271]

News consumption

[edit]

Over the centuries, commentators on newspapers and society have repeatedly observed widespread human interest in news.[4][274] Elite members of a society's political and economic institutions might rely on news as one limited source of information, for the masses, news represents a relatively exclusive window onto the operations by which a society is managed.[275]

Regular people in societies with news media often spend a lot of time reading or watching news reports.[276] Newspapers became significant aspects of national and literary culture—as exemplified by James Joyce's Ulysses, which derives from the newspapers of 16 June (and thereabouts), 1904, and represents the newspaper office itself as a vital part of life in Dublin.[277]

A 1945 study by sociologist Bernard Berelson found that during the 1945 New York newspaper strike, New Yorkers exhibited a virtual addiction to news, describing themselves as "lost", "nervous", "isolated", and "suffering" due to the withdrawal.[278] Television news has become still further embedded in everyday life, with specific programming anticipated at different times of day.[279] Children tend to find the news boring, too serious, or emotionally disturbing. They come to perceive news as characteristic of adulthood, and begin watching television news in their teenage years because of the adult status it confers.[280]

People exhibit various forms of skepticism towards the news. Studies of tabloid readers found that many of them gain pleasure from seeing through the obviously fake or poorly constructed stories—and get their "real news" from television.[281]

Social and cultural cohesion

[edit]

An important feature distinguishing news from private information transfers is the impression that when one reads (or hears, or watches) it, one joins a larger public.[282] In this regard news serves to unify its receivers under the banner of a culture, or a society, as well as into the sub-demographics of a society targeted by their favorite kind of news.[283] News thus plays a role in nation-building, the construction of a national identity.[284]

Images connected with news can also become iconic and gain a fixed role in the culture. Examples such as Alfred Eisenstaedt's photograph V-J Day in Times Square, Nick Ut's photograph of Phan Thi Kim Phuc and other children running from a napalm blast in Vietnam; Kevin Carter's photograph of a starving child being stalked by a vulture;[195] etc.

With the new interconnectedness of global media, the experience of receiving news along with a world audience reinforces the social cohesion effect on a larger scale.[285] As a corollary, global media culture may erode the uniqueness and cohesion of national cultures.[199]

Public sphere

[edit]

This collective form experience can be understood to constitute a political realm or public sphere.[282][286] In this view, the news media constitute a fourth estate which serves to check and balance the operations of government.[279]

This idea, at least as a goal to be sought, has re-emerged in the era of global communications.[287] Today, unprecedented opportunities exist for public analysis and discussion of world events.[288] According to one interpretation of the CNN effect, instantaneous global news coverage can rally public opinion as never before to motivate political action.[289] In 1989, local and global communications media-enabled instant exposure to and discussion of the Chinese government's actions in Tiananmen Square. The news about Tiananmen Square travelled over a fax machine, telephone, newspaper, radio, and television, and continued to travel even after the government imposed new restrictions on local telecommunications.[290]

News events

[edit]

As the technological means for disseminating news grew more powerful, news became an experience which millions of people could undergo simultaneously. Outstanding news experiences can exert a profound influence on millions of people. Through its power to effect a shared experience, news events can mold the collective memory of a society.[291][292]

One type of news event, the media event, is a scripted pageant organized for a mass live broadcast. Media events include athletic contests such as the Super Bowl and the Olympics, cultural events like awards ceremonies and celebrity funerals, and also political events such as coronations, debates between electoral candidates, and diplomatic ceremonies.[293] These events typically unfold according to a common format which simplifies the transmission of news items about them.[294] Usually, they have the effect of increasing the perceived unity of all parties involved, which include the broadcasters and audience.[295] Today, international events such as a national declaration of independence can be scripted in advance with the major news agencies, with staff specially deployed to key locations worldwide in advance of the life news broadcast. Public relations companies can participate in these events as well.[296]

The perception that an ongoing crisis is taking place further increases the significance of live news. People rely on the news and constantly seek more of it, to learn new information and to seek reassurance amidst feelings of fear and uncertainty.[297] Crises can also increase the effect of the news on social cohesion, and lead the population of a country to "rally" behind its current leadership.[298] The rise of a global news system goes hand in hand with the advent of terrorism and other sensational acts, which have power in proportion to the audience they capture. In 1979, the capture of American hostages in Iran dominated months of news coverage in the western media, gained the status of a "crisis", and influenced a presidential election.[299]

South Africans overwhelmingly describe the end of Apartheid as a source of the country's most important news.[300] In the United States, news events such as the assassinations of the 1960s (of John F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King, Jr., and Robert F. Kennedy), the 1969 Moon landing, the 1986 Space Shuttle Challenger explosion, the 1997 death of Princess Diana, the intervention of the Supreme Court in the 2000 presidential election and the 2001 September 11 attacks.[301] In Jordan, people cited numerous memorable news events involving death and war, including the death of King Hussein, Princess Diana, and Yitzhak Rabin. Positive news stories found memorable by Jordanians featured political events affecting their lives and families—such as the Israeli withdrawal from South Lebanon, and the Israel–Jordan peace treaty.[302]

News coverage can also shape collective memory in retrospect. A study of Israeli news coverage leading up to the media event of the nation's 60th birthday found that news coverage of events like the Holocaust, World War Two, and subsequent Israeli wars increased the perceived importance of these events in the minds of citizens.[303]

News making

[edit]

News making is the act of making the news or doing something that is considered to be newsworthy. When discussing the act of news making, scholars refer to specific models. Five of these models are the Professional Model, Mirror Model, Organizational Model, Political Model, and Civic Journalism Model.[304]

The Professional Model is when skilled peoples put certain events together for a specific audience. The reaction of the audience is influential because it can determine the impact that the particular article or newspaper has on the readers.[305] The Mirror Model states that news should reflect reality. This model aims to focus on particular events and provide accuracy in reporting. The Organizational Model is also known as the Bargaining Model.[304] It focuses on influencing various news organizations by applying pressures to governmental processes. The Political Model outlines that news represents the ideological biases of the people as well as the various pressures of the political environment. This model mainly influences journalists and attempts to promote public opinion.[305] The Civic Journalism Model is when the press discovers the concerns of the people and uses that to write stories. This allows the audience to play an active role in society.

Models of news making help define what the news is and how it influences readers. But it does not necessarily account for the content of print news and online media. Stories are selected if they have a strong impact, incorporate violence and scandal, are familiar and local, and if they are timely.

News Stories with a strong impact can be easily understood by a reader. Violence and scandal create an entertaining and attention-grabbing story.[304] Familiarity makes a story more relatable because the reader knows who is being talked about. Proximity can influence a reader more. A story that is timely will receive more coverage because it is a current event. The process of selecting stories coupled with the models of news making are how the media is effective and impactful in society.

Psychological effects

[edit]

Exposure to constant news coverage of war can lead to stress and anxiety.[306] Television coverage of the destruction of the World Trade Center in 2001, which repeated the same footage over and over, led to symptoms of psychological trauma experienced across the United States.[307] Studies have indicated that children have been traumatized by exposure to television of other frightening events, including the Challenger disaster.[308] Journalists themselves also experience trauma and guilt.[309]

Research also suggest that constant representations of violence in the news lead people to overestimate the frequency of its occurrence in the real world, thus increasing their level of fear in everyday situations.[310]

Influence

[edit]

The content and style of news delivery certainly have effects on the general public, with the magnitude and precise nature of these effects being tough to determine experimentally.[311] In Western societies, television viewing has been so ubiquitous that its total effect on psychology and culture leave few alternatives for comparison.[312]

News is the leading source of knowledge about global affairs for people around the world.[313] According to agenda-setting theory, the general public will identify as its priorities those issues which are highlighted on the news.[314] The agenda-setting model has been well-supported by research, which indicate that the public's self-reported concerns respond to changes in news coverage rather than changes in the underlying issue itself.[315] The less an issue obviously affects people's lives, the bigger an influence media agenda-setting can have on their opinion of it.[316] The agenda-setting power becomes even stronger in practice because of the correspondence in news topics promulgated by different media channels.[317]

Influence of sponsorship

[edit]

It has been acknowledged that sponsorship has historically influenced various news stories.[318][319][320] This history gained widespread attention following the release of the 2013 film Anchorman 2.[318][319][320] One example in recent time is the fact that Facebook has invested heavily in news sources and purchasing time on local news media outlets.[321][322] TechCrunch journalist Josh Continue even stated in February 2018 that the company "stole the news business" and used sponsorship to make many news publishers its "ghostwriters."[321] In January 2019, founder Mark Zuckerberg announced that he will spend $300 million in local news buys over a three-year period.[322][323]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]

Sources and further reading

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia
from Grokipedia
News constitutes the dissemination of timely, factual reports on recent events, developments, and matters of public significance, typically produced by journalists through structured processes to verify and contextualize information for audiences. This core function distinguishes news from or opinion, emphasizing empirical and causal linkages over , though its execution varies by medium and outlet. Historically, formalized news emerged in ancient Rome with the , public inscriptions of official announcements dating to approximately 59 BCE, marking an early shift from oral proclamations to recorded public information. Subsequent advancements, including printed corantos in 17th-century Europe and the rise of telegraph-enabled agencies in the , accelerated news transmission, enabling broader societal awareness of distant events and fostering interconnected global discourse. By the , radio and television introduced real-time broadcasting, amplifying news's immediacy and reach, as exemplified by coverage of pivotal moments like the 1969 . In modern society, news plays a pivotal role in informing civic participation, shaping perceptions of , and influencing through agenda-setting effects, where prominent coverage elevates certain issues in . Empirical analyses affirm its capacity to orient individuals toward actual conditions, aiding decision-making amid complexity, yet this influence hinges on source reliability. Defining achievements include enabling , such as exposés driving reforms, but controversies abound: distorts priorities, while systemic biases—predominantly liberal in mainstream U.S. outlets per —systematically skew framing and selection, eroding objectivity. Public trust in news has plummeted, with only 28% of viewing as reporting fully, accurately, and fairly as of 2025, reflecting disillusionment from perceived partisanship and proliferation. This decline correlates with polarized consumption patterns, where ideological alignment trumps factual verification, exacerbating societal divisions. Despite digital fragmentation offering diverse perspectives, challenges persist in balancing speed with verification, underscoring news's dual potential as a tool for truth or manipulation in causal chains of public action.

Definition and Characteristics

Etymology and Core Meaning

The English word "news" emerged in late Middle English around the 14th century as a plural form of the adjective "new," originally signifying "new things" or tidings of recent events. Its earliest recorded use dates to before 1382, as evidenced in Wycliffite Bible translations referring to reports or announcements of novelty. The term parallels Old French nouvelles ("new things"), itself derived from Latin nova (feminine plural of novus, meaning "new"), reflecting a conceptual emphasis on fresh or unprecedented information. A persistent posits "news" as an for "north, east, west, south," implying all-encompassing directional coverage of events; however, this lacks historical basis, as the word predates modern formation by centuries and no contemporary sources support such an origin. Instead, the term's development aligns with broader European linguistic patterns for denoting updates or intelligence, as seen in early 15th-century senses of "tidings of something lately taken place." At its core, news denotes verifiable reports of current or recent happenings that possess inherent novelty, typically involving human interest, conflict, or consequence, distinguishing it from routine or historical . This meaning underscores a causal focus on events' immediacy and potential impact, prioritizing empirical recency over archival record, as the term evolved to encompass disseminated rather than mere novelty in isolation. By the , it had solidified as "intelligence of something that has lately taken place," emphasizing timeliness as a defining criterion.

Criteria of Newsworthiness

The criteria of newsworthiness, often termed or factors, refer to the qualitative attributes that journalists and editors use to determine whether an event or development merits coverage as news, influencing its selection, placement, and emphasis in media outlets. These criteria emerged from systematic analyses of news content and gatekeeping processes, with foundational empirical work by and Mari Holmboe Ruge in their 1965 study of foreign news coverage in Norwegian newspapers, where they identified 12 factors derived from observed patterns in reported crises such as those in , , and . Subsequent scholarship has validated and refined these through content analyses showing that stories scoring higher on multiple factors receive greater prominence, such as front-page placement or longer articles, as demonstrated in large-scale examinations of European and U.S. media. While not universal or rigidly applied, these criteria prioritize events with high potential to engage audiences based on deviation from norms, societal relevance, and structural media constraints like space or airtime limitations. Core news values include , where events unfolding in short cycles align with daily or hourly news production demands; for instance, stock market fluctuations reported same-day gain traction over gradual economic shifts. Threshold measures the scale or intensity required to cross a perceptual barrier, such as a disaster claiming hundreds of lives versus isolated incidents, empirically linked to story selection in international reporting. Unambiguity favors clear-cut events over ambiguous ones, reducing interpretive disputes and aiding verifiable reporting. Proximity, both geographic and cultural, elevates local or relatable stories; data from U.S. outlets show domestic events outpacing foreign ones unless amplified by other factors. Additional factors encompass prominence or elite references, where involvement of high-status individuals, nations, or organizations boosts coverage—evident in disproportionate to U.S. or Western leaders in flows. Consequence or impact assesses effects on audiences' lives, economies, or policies, with studies confirming that stories implying broad societal repercussions, like policy changes affecting millions, dominate front pages. Conflict and negativity draw on inherent human interest in disputes or harms, as negative events (e.g., wars, scandals) consistently outperform positive ones in empirical prominence metrics, potentially skewing public perception toward . Unexpectedness or novelty highlights surprises defying expectations, while human interest emphasizes emotional or personal angles, such as individual tragedies amid larger events, to foster audience connection. These values operate cumulatively and compensatorily: a story weak in one area (e.g., low proximity) may compensate via strength in another (e.g., high involvement), as quantified in regression models of news item positioning. Empirical critiques note cultural variations—Western overemphasize negativity and elites, potentially underrepresenting routine positive developments in non- contexts—and evolving influences from digital metrics like shares, though traditional factors remain dominant in professional judgment. Gatekeepers apply them amid institutional pressures, including audience data and editorial policies, but core reliance on deviation from the expected underscores a causal link between event attributes and media amplification.

Stylistic Elements and Tone

News writing employs the inverted pyramid structure, prioritizing the most critical information—who, what, when, where, why, and how—in the , followed by less essential details. This format, which emerged in the mid-19th century amid telegraph use and wartime reporting constraints, enables efficient editing by allowing truncation from the bottom without sacrificing core facts. Sentences favor for clarity and directness, as in "The president signed the bill" rather than passive constructions that obscure agency. Language remains concise, avoiding unnecessary words to enhance readability and focus on verifiable details over speculation. Style guides such as the Stylebook enforce consistency in grammar, punctuation, and terminology to minimize ambiguity, emphasizing brevity while attributing sources explicitly to maintain accountability. Paragraphs are short, often one to three sentences, facilitating skimming by time-pressed audiences. The prevailing tone in professional news strives for objectivity, relying on verifiable facts and balanced sourcing to present events impartially without injecting reporter opinion. Neutral phrasing avoids emotive adjectives, favoring descriptors like "disputed" over loaded terms such as "controversial" unless contextually precise. However, empirical analyses reveal deviations, with mainstream outlets exhibiting a left-leaning through selective framing and citation patterns; for instance, a study of references in major media found citations of liberal sources exceeding conservative ones by a factor of about 10 to 1 during the early . Such patterns, attributable to journalistic demographics skewed toward urban, higher-education backgrounds, undermine nominal neutrality, particularly in political coverage where tonal negativity toward conservative positions exceeds that toward liberal ones. Tabloid and opinion-driven formats diverge further, incorporating or advocacy, though hard news standards nominally reject these.

Historical Evolution

Ancient and Pre-Printing Dissemination

In , the represented one of the earliest systematized methods of news dissemination, initiated in 59 BCE by to publicize official proceedings and counteract rumors. These daily records included senate debates, criminal trials, military reports, births, deaths, and gladiatorial outcomes, inscribed on white stone or metal tablets and posted in the Forum and other public venues for citizen access. Copies were also transcribed onto for distribution to provinces via messengers, ensuring broader reach within the empire, with the practice persisting until at least 235 CE. Parallel developments occurred in ancient , where during the (618–907 CE), handwritten imperial bulletins known as dibao or chaobao circulated official edicts, court news, and administrative announcements primarily among bureaucrats but occasionally to select public audiences. These manuscripts, produced by government scribes, addressed the challenges of coordinating information across vast territories, predating printed forms and influencing later (960–1279 CE) practices like the Kai Yuan Za Bao, which expanded coverage to include local events and . Private, unofficial xiaobao sheets also emerged, often illicitly sharing rumors and critiques, though suppressed by authorities. In medieval , news propagation depended heavily on oral networks and human couriers due to limited and absence of mass reproduction. Royal and messengers, often mounted for speed, delivered verbal reports or sealed letters containing diplomatic updates, battle outcomes, and royal decrees across kingdoms, with relay systems enabling travel from to in about two weeks under optimal conditions. Locally, town criers—official heralds equipped with bells or horns—gathered crowds in marketplaces to proclaim bylaws, market prices, lost property, and national tidings received via these networks, serving as vital conduits for illiterate populations until the in some areas. This method's reliability hinged on the crier's loyalty and volume, as cries like "Oyez, oyez" demanded attention for unaltered repetition of sourced information.

Emergence of Newspapers and Print Media

The invention of the movable-type by in around 1440 marked a pivotal technological advancement that facilitated the of texts, transitioning news dissemination from labor-intensive handwritten manuscripts to reproducible printed formats. This innovation drastically reduced costs and increased output, enabling printers to distribute information beyond elite subscribers of bespoke news sheets, known as avisi or corantos, which had circulated irregularly in since the late . By mechanizing the process, the press created conditions for periodic publications that compiled current events, commerce reports, and foreign intelligence, laying the groundwork for newspapers as a distinct medium. The earliest recognized printed newspaper emerged in in 1605, when printer published Relation aller Fürnemmen und gedenckwürdigen Historien, a weekly compilation initially produced to supplant his prior services for merchants and officials. Unlike sporadic broadsides or pamphlets, this publication featured structured sections on notable events, printed in German for a regional audience, and was granted a privilege by local authorities to protect it from imitation, reflecting early regulatory involvement in print media. By 1609, similar weekly papers appeared in nearby German cities, such as and , expanding the model to include domestic and international dispatches gathered via correspondents and postal networks. The format proliferated across Europe in the 1620s and 1630s, reaching , , and , where publications like the Weekly Newes (1622) adapted the German template but often faced censorship under absolutist regimes, limiting content to approved foreign news to avoid charges. In , the Oxford Gazette, first issued on November 7, 1665, during the Great Plague's displacement of the court, evolved into upon the royal return, serving as an official record with a print run initially around 1,200 copies. These early newspapers prioritized utility for traders—reporting shipping arrivals, commodity prices, and diplomatic shifts—over sensationalism, with circulation constrained by illiteracy rates exceeding 70% in most regions and distribution reliant on slow coach and horse relays. Government licensing, as enforced in via the Licensing Act of 1662, ensured many outlets functioned as extensions of state propaganda, underscoring how print media's emergence intertwined with political control rather than unfettered public discourse.

Broadcast and Electronic Expansion

The advent of radio broadcasting revolutionized news dissemination by enabling near-instantaneous audio transmission to mass audiences, surpassing the delays inherent in print media. On November 2, 1920, Westinghouse-owned station KDKA in Pittsburgh aired the results of the U.S. presidential election between Warren G. Harding and James M. Cox, marking the first scheduled commercial radio broadcast and demonstrating radio's potential for real-time election coverage. By the mid-1920s, major networks such as the National Broadcasting Company (NBC), formed in 1926, and the Columbia Broadcasting System (CBS) introduced regular sponsored news bulletins, expanding from election results to daily weather, sports, and international events. Radio's reach grew rapidly during the 1930s, with stations like the BBC launching structured news services in 1922, providing hourly bulletins that reached millions across the British Empire via shortwave. World War II accelerated radio's role in news, as governments utilized it for and public alerts, with services like CBS's World News Roundup, initiated in , offering multiple daily updates from correspondents worldwide. Post-war, radio maintained dominance in developing regions due to its low cost and portability, while in the U.S., by , over 90% of households owned radios, facilitating widespread access to breaking stories like the broadcasts. This era underscored radio's causal impact on public awareness, enabling synchronized national responses to events but also highlighting vulnerabilities to centralized control and , as evidenced by wartime in multiple countries. Television extended broadcast news into the visual realm, combining audio immediacy with imagery to enhance comprehension and emotional impact. Experimental TV news began in the 1930s, with the transmitting its first television service in 1936, including newsreels, though wartime disruptions halted regular programming until 1946. In the U.S., and launched commercial TV news in the late 1940s; for instance, 's Camel Newsreel Theatre debuted in 1948, evolving into hour-long formats by the 1950s with shows like the Huntley-Brinkley Report in 1956, which drew 20-30 million nightly viewers. The 1963 assassination of President exemplified TV's transformative power, as networks provided over 70 hours of continuous coverage, shifting public consumption toward visual storytelling and establishing television as the primary news medium in affluent nations by the . Electronic advancements, including coaxial cables and early satellites, further expanded broadcast reach pre-internet. The 1951 transcontinental microwave relay enabled the first coast-to-coast live TV broadcast in the U.S., linking Eastern and Western networks for national coverage. By 1962, the Telstar satellite facilitated the first live transatlantic TV signals, allowing events like President Kennedy's speech to be viewed globally, though limited to brief windows due to orbital constraints. Cable news emerged with CNN's launch on June 1, 1980, offering 24-hour programming via satellite distribution, which by 1982 reached 1.7 million U.S. households and pioneered nonstop news cycles independent of prime-time schedules. These developments prioritized speed and simultaneity, fundamentally altering news from periodic print summaries to pervasive electronic flows, though they introduced challenges like visual bias toward dramatic events over nuanced analysis.

Digital Transformation and Internet Integration

The integration of the into news dissemination began in the early , with initial experiments in online publishing marking a shift from analog to digital formats. By , news organizations started establishing web presences, enabling real-time updates that bypassed traditional print and broadcast schedules. This period saw the launch of dedicated online news sites, such as those by major outlets experimenting with hypertext and newsletters, which allowed for instantaneous global reach compared to daily newspaper cycles. The proliferation of in the early 2000s accelerated this transformation, fostering multimedia integration like video embeds and interactive graphics in news stories. platforms, emerging around 2004 with sites like , further embedded news into everyday digital interactions, turning passive consumption into participatory sharing. By 2025, 54% of Americans accessed news primarily via and video networks, surpassing television as the leading source—a reversal from pre-digital dominance of broadcast media. This shift democratized production, enabling through on platforms like (now X), where eyewitness reports often precede professional verification, as seen in events like the 2010 Arab Spring uprisings. Digital tools reshaped news production by emphasizing speed and data-driven reporting. Algorithms on platforms like and feeds prioritize engagement metrics, such as clicks and shares, over editorial curation, leading to a 24/7 news cycle where stories break via social aggregation before traditional outlets confirm them. , leveraging tools like APIs and analytics software, emerged as a staple, with outlets employing computational methods to analyze public datasets—evident in investigations like the in 2016, which relied on collaborative digital sifting of leaked files. However, this velocity has causal trade-offs: internet-enabled reduces reliance on established gatekeepers but amplifies unverified claims, contributing to a 30% revenue decline for print newspapers due to cannibalized readership. Challenges in this integration include algorithmic amplification of and . Platforms' recommendation systems, optimized for retention, often create echo chambers by surfacing content aligning with users' prior views, exacerbating polarization as evidenced by studies showing skewed exposure during . proliferates faster than corrections; for instance, during the 2016 U.S. , false stories on garnered higher engagement than factual reports from major outlets. By , 58% of global respondents expressed concern over distinguishing true from false news online, underscoring credibility erosion amid AI-generated deepfakes and reduced human oversight in . Despite these issues, digital metrics have driven innovations like paywalls, with digital subscriptions rising—e.g., reported over 10 million online subscribers by 2023—offering a path to absent in ad-dependent print models.

News Production Processes

Sourcing, Verification, and Gatekeeping

Sourcing in news production involves journalists acquiring information from diverse origins, including eyewitness accounts, official statements, expert interviews, and wire services provided by agencies such as or the . Empirical studies reveal a heavy dependence on elite sources like government officials and representatives, which can skew coverage toward institutional perspectives and reduce input from non-official actors. This pattern persists across local and national media, with analyses showing that private citizens and marginalized groups are infrequently sourced, limiting narrative diversity. Verification processes aim to authenticate sourced material through cross-referencing with independent , of original documents, and consultations to minimize inaccuracies. In structured outlets, dedicated fact-checkers employ systematic protocols, such as tracking changes in drafts and querying ambiguous claims, before final approval by editors. However, digital media's emphasis on rapid publication often truncates these steps, leading to reliance on unvetted or single-source reporting, as observed in qualitative studies of journalistic workflows. Gatekeeping encompasses the editorial selection and filtering of stories for , originally conceptualized in David Manning White's analysis of a wire editor who rejected over half of available items based on subjective assessments of relevance and taste. This multi-stage —spanning reporters, editors, and producers—weighs factors like resource constraints and audience appeal, but empirical models demonstrate how it can embed biases through selective inclusion or omission of information aligned with organizational ideologies. In , such gatekeeping frequently manifests systemic left-leaning tendencies, privileging sources from academia and progressive institutions while downplaying alternative viewpoints, as evidenced in content analyses of coverage patterns. These elements interconnect, with sourcing feeding into verification and gatekeeping ultimately shaping public information flows, yet lapses in rigor contribute to erosion when unverified or narrowly sourced stories prevail.

Role of News Agencies and Organizations

News agencies, also known as wire services, serve as centralized hubs for gathering, verifying, and distributing news content to media outlets worldwide, enabling efficient dissemination of information that would otherwise require extensive individual reporting resources. These organizations employ networks of correspondents and stringers to collect from events, process it into standardized reports, and supply it via subscription to newspapers, broadcasters, and digital platforms, often forming the foundational material for secondary news stories. The (AP), established in 1846 as a owned by U.S. newspapers to share telegraph costs for election coverage, exemplifies this model, now serving over 1,300 newspapers and 5,000 broadcast stations globally. Similarly, , founded in 1851 by Paul Julius Reuter using pigeons and later telegraphs for commodity news between European cities, expanded into comprehensive international coverage by the late . In the production process, news agencies prioritize speed and breadth, deploying specialized teams for text, , video, and data services, which smaller or regionally focused outlets integrate into their outputs without maintaining costly overseas bureaus. This syndication reduces redundancy in global reporting while amplifying the reach of agency-sourced facts; empirical analyses indicate that up to 80% of international in non-Western media derives from a handful of dominant agencies like AP, , and (AFP), shaping the agenda of what events gain visibility. Agencies operate on a wholesale basis, generating revenue primarily through tiered subscription fees based on usage volume and content type, with reporting annual revenues exceeding $6 billion in recent years from and information services. This economic structure incentivizes volume production and real-time updates, supported by technological advancements from telegraph wires to satellite feeds and digital APIs. The role extends to gatekeeping, where agencies apply editorial filters for newsworthiness, factual accuracy, and neutrality, though their selections inherently influence flows by prioritizing events aligned with their operational bases, predominantly in Western capitals. Historical cartels, such as the 1870 agreement among major agencies dividing territorial monopolies for news collection, underscore their control over pipelines until antitrust pressures dismantled them post-World War II. In contemporary dynamics, agencies facilitate cross-border verification through shared databases and contribute to packages, but reliance on them can homogenize narratives, as studies show Western-centric framing in coverage of non-Western events due to correspondent distributions and source access disparities. State-affiliated agencies, like Russia's or China's Xinhua, parallel this by serving domestic needs alongside commercial syndication, contrasting with commercial giants' emphasis on advertiser-neutral reporting.

Institutional Influences and State Involvement

State involvement in news production manifests through direct ownership, funding mechanisms, and regulatory oversight, often prioritizing regime stability over independent reporting. In authoritarian regimes, governments exert comprehensive control over media outlets to propagate official narratives and suppress dissent; for instance, (CCTV), the country's primary state broadcaster, operates under the direct authority of the Chinese Communist Party's Publicity Department, which dictates content alignment with party directives. Similarly, 's RT (formerly Russia Today), funded by the state with an annual budget exceeding $300 million as of 2022, functions as a tool for Kremlin-directed campaigns, including covert operations to influence foreign elections and narratives. In democratic contexts, institutional influences arise more subtly via public funding and structures that can incentivize . The , funded primarily through a mandatory television license fee collected from households—generating approximately £3.7 billion in 2023—operates under a renewed every decade by the government, which appoints key executives and sets strategic remits, potentially aligning coverage with national interests during conflicts or elections. Governments worldwide leverage subsidies, tax incentives, and grants to shape media landscapes; a 2017 analysis documented over 30 countries using such funding to reward compliant outlets and penalize critical ones, effectively "controlling the money to control the media." Regulatory frameworks further embed state influence in gatekeeping processes, where institutions filter news flows to mitigate perceived threats. Historical precedents include wartime offices, such as the U.S. during , which coordinated media messaging to bolster public support. In contemporary settings, state-backed entities like China's vast surveillance-integrated media apparatus enforce content uniformity, while even public broadcasters face cuts as leverage—evident in proposed U.S. reductions to and allocations in 2025, totaling potential losses of $500 million annually, amid accusations of bias. These dynamics underscore causal pathways where financial dependence correlates with reduced adversarial reporting, as empirical studies link state subsidies to diminished investigative scrutiny of actions. Non-state institutions, including international bodies and NGOs, amplify these influences through partnerships and standards that indirectly favor certain narratives. News agencies like , while privately held, navigate state pressures via embedded journalists and access dependencies, shaping global wire services that downstream outlets rely on for 70-80% of international coverage. Such entanglements highlight systemic risks where institutional routines prioritize elite sources—often governmental—over diverse or inputs, perpetuating coverage imbalances verifiable in content analyses of major outlets.

Economics of News

Business Models and Revenue Sources

Traditional news organizations primarily relied on and circulation revenues. In the United States, generated $9.8 billion in , with digital formats accounting for 48% of that total, while circulation reached $11.6 billion, driven by both print and digital subscriptions. Broadcast news outlets, including television and radio, depended heavily on commercial , often tied to viewer ratings and time slots, supplemented by syndication fees. Public service broadcasters like the funded operations through mandatory television license fees, collecting approximately £3.7 billion in the 2023-2024 fiscal year to support ad-free programming. The digital transformation disrupted these models, as online platforms such as and Meta captured a disproportionate share of advertising dollars, leaving news publishers with fragmented revenues. Digital advertising for news sites grew modestly, but overall industry ad income declined amid platform changes that reduced traffic referrals by up to 48% from sites like in 2024. This shift compelled many outlets to prioritize direct reader payments over ad dependency, though challenges persisted due to audience fragmentation and news avoidance, affecting 39% of respondents in global surveys. Subscriptions and paywalls emerged as core strategies for sustainability, with 80% of publishers citing digital subscriptions as their top revenue priority in 2024. Across 20 countries, 17% of individuals paid for online news in the past year, a stable figure with variations by market—reaching 40% in but only 8% in the . Successful implementations, such as ' bundled digital access exceeding 10 million subscribers by mid-2024, demonstrated viability for premium content, though heavy discounting eroded full-price uptake, with 41% of payers receiving reduced rates. Diversification beyond core advertising and subscriptions became essential, encompassing events, , and ancillary services. "Other income" streams, including live events and , grew 5% year-over-year for many publishers in 2024, offsetting ad shortfalls. Examples include newsletters with sponsored content, monetization attracting 13% monthly younger listeners, and integrations like product recommendations, which bolstered revenues for outlets experimenting with and syndication. Non-profit models, reliant on and grants, supported at organizations like , though scalability remained limited compared to commercial hybrids.

Advertising, Sponsorship, and Conflicts

Advertising has historically served as the primary source for many news organizations, often comprising 50-80% of total income for print newspapers in the mid-20th century before digital disruption. In recent years, however, 's share has declined amid competition from online platforms; for instance, U.S. newspaper fell 5.4% in 2023, reflecting broader shifts away from print. Digital advertising offers partial compensation, with U.S. online ad revenues reaching $259 billion in 2024, up 15% from 2023, though news outlets capture only a fraction amid dominance by tech giants like and Meta. This reliance exposes news producers to economic pressures that can compromise , as outlets prioritize advertiser-friendly content to sustain streams. Sponsorships, including and , have proliferated as alternatives to traditional display ads, blending promotional material with editorial formats to evade ad blockers and reader aversion. Native ad spending in the U.S. surged 37% in 2021 and was projected to exceed $98 billion by 2023, with news sites increasingly adopting it due to eroding traditional revenues. Over 80% of news consumers report that integrated ads maintain or boost brand trust, yet this format risks deceiving audiences by mimicking without clear distinctions. Ethical guidelines from bodies like the Canadian Association of Journalists warn of among producers, where sponsored pieces erode public perception of objectivity. Conflicts of interest arise when advertiser demands intersect with news content, empirically linked to biased coverage favoring sponsors. A study analyzed news responses to product recalls, finding that outlets with higher ad dependence from affected firms published fewer negative stories, demonstrating advertisers' leverage to suppress critical reporting. Similarly, empirical analyses confirm that elevated revenues correlate with favoritism toward corporate interests, as seen in reduced scrutiny of industries like automobiles when ad volumes peak. Mainstream media's dependence on large corporate advertisers—often from , tech, and consumer goods—fosters systemic caution in covering business malfeasance, a dynamic exacerbated by concentrated ad markets where a few firms control spending. While disclosures mitigate some risks, incomplete labeling and pressure to meet quotas undermine them, prompting calls for stricter separation between commercial and news divisions to preserve credibility.

Financial Challenges and Media Declines

Traditional news organizations have experienced persistent revenue shortfalls since the early , primarily due to the migration of advertising dollars to digital platforms dominated by technology companies like and Meta, which captured over 50% of U.S. digital advertising revenue by 2020 and continued to expand their share. This shift exacerbated the erosion of print circulation and classified ad income, with U.S. daily circulation (print and digital) falling to 20.9 million in 2022, an 8% decline from prior years, and total newspaper employment dropping to 91,550 by 2024. Newspaper closures accelerated the decline, with 136 U.S. papers shutting down in the year leading to October 2025, following 130 the previous year, contributing to over 3,000 closures since 2005 and creating news deserts affecting approximately 50 million Americans with limited local coverage. These losses stemmed from unrecouped print ad revenue, as digital alternatives failed to generate equivalent income despite to major sites; for instance, web visits to top U.S. websites declined amid broader industry contraction. Independent publishers and small chains were hit hardest, with funding shortages and consolidation unable to stem the tide. Broadcast media faced parallel pressures, with U.S. TV and radio stations projected to see drop 9.4% to $32.97 billion in from $36.40 billion previously, driven by and competition from streaming services. Overall media job cuts reached nearly 15,000 in , including over 500 journalists, with trends continuing through at around 14,000 total media losses, though news-specific cuts showed some stabilization compared to broader sectors. Publishers' attempts to pivot to subscriptions and paywalls yielded mixed results, as operational costs rose amid stagnant digital revenues, with firms reporting dual challenges of declining traditional streams and insufficient . Economic fragility from platform intermediation threatened press sustainability, as ad spending surged 14% to $247.3 billion in 2024, diverting funds from direct publisher support. This dynamic underscored a causal link between tech intermediaries' and news outlets' inability to retain value from content distribution.

Objectivity, Bias, and Credibility

Historical and Theoretical Standards

The concept of originated in the late 19th and early 20th centuries , transitioning from a partisan press dominated by political affiliations to a professional standard emphasizing neutrality and fact-based reporting. Prior to this shift, newspapers in the 18th and 19th centuries openly aligned with parties or interests, such as or Republican factions, where editorial bias was the norm rather than an aberration. This evolution was driven by cultural premises of and scientific , culminating in four stages: initial detachment from overt partisanship around 1900, adoption of "information" over "opinion" models by 1910, institutionalization through professional codes in the 1920s, and refinement amid I's propaganda exposures. Walter Lippmann played a pivotal role in theorizing objectivity, arguing in his 1922 book Public Opinion that journalists must counteract human "stereotypes"—preconceived mental images distorting reality—through detached, evidence-driven reporting akin to scientific method. Lippmann viewed objectivity not as personal impartiality but as a procedural discipline: verifying facts independently, minimizing subjective interpretation, and representing events as they occurred to inform a rationally limited public. This contrasted with John Dewey's critique, who emphasized participatory democracy over elite mediation, yet Lippmann's framework influenced codes like the American Society of Newspaper Editors' 1923 canons, which prioritized truth-seeking over advocacy. Theoretically, objectivity standards mandate separating facts from values, requiring reporters to function as "neutral stenographers" by sourcing multiple perspectives, cross-verifying claims, and avoiding loaded language. Credibility hinges on transparency in methods, such as disclosing sources and corrections, fostering public trust through accountability rather than assumed neutrality. These principles, rooted in post-World War I disillusionment with propaganda, aimed to elevate journalism as a public service, though critics note their limitations in concealing structural power imbalances by privileging official voices. Empirical adherence involves rigorous fact-checking protocols, as outlined in professional ethics, to mitigate bias while acknowledging that complete detachment remains aspirational given journalists' human fallibility.

Empirical Evidence of Systemic Biases

Studies utilizing political donations by journalists as a proxy for ideological alignment reveal a pronounced skew toward left-leaning causes in the United States. In the 2020 election cycle, over 90% of contributions from reporters and media personnel—totaling at least $110,000—supported Democratic candidates such as Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, with minimal support for Republicans. Similar patterns emerged in earlier cycles; for instance, data from the Center for Responsive Politics indicated that 96.7% of journalist donations in the 2016 cycle favored Democrats, far exceeding the general population's distribution. These disparities persist even among public media employees, where contributions skew heavily progressive. Surveys of journalists' self-reported political views corroborate this of systemic left-liberal orientation, particularly in Western . A comprehensive analysis across 17 nations, including the U.S., U.K., and , matched journalists' ideologies to national election outcomes and found that media professionals consistently lean left of both the public and prevailing voter preferences, with the gap widest in like the U.S. and . In the U.S., Pew Research data from 2022 showed that journalists are far more likely than the general public to reject "bothsidesism," with 55% arguing that not every perspective deserves equal coverage—a stance aligned with progressive critiques of balanced reporting. Content analyses provide quantitative measures of slant through citation patterns and story framing. Groseclose and Milyo (2005) developed an ideological scoring system based on media outlets' references to think tanks, benchmarking against members of ; they found that major networks like and ABC's scored around 73 on the Americans for Democratic Action (ADA) liberal scale—comparable to the most left-leaning Democrats—while print outlets like and averaged 64-66, exceeding the average House Democrat's 50. This methodology, which avoids subjective coding, highlights a uniform leftward shift absent in more centrist or right-leaning sources like editorial page (ADA score of 40). Complementary work by Gentzkow and Shapiro (2010) on U.S. newspapers confirmed that slant correlates with ideology but is amplified in markets dominated by legacy outlets, where content tilts left to match urban, educated demographics. These findings align with broader empirical reviews of detection, which classify ideological slant as a dominant form in mainstream coverage, often manifesting through selective emphasis on progressive policy frames over conservative ones. However, such biases are not uniform globally; in non-Western contexts, state-controlled media exhibit pro-government tilts, though Western empirical data predominantly underscores left-liberal systemic patterns in independent outlets. Critics of these studies note potential confounders like self-selection in donations or survey samples, yet the convergence across methods—donations, surveys, and objective content metrics—supports the prevalence of ideological asymmetry in news production.

Criticisms from Diverse Perspectives

Conservatives and right-leaning commentators frequently criticize mainstream news outlets for exhibiting a systemic left-wing bias, manifested through disproportionate negative coverage of conservative figures and policies, selective omission of stories damaging to progressive causes, and framing that aligns with Democratic narratives. For instance, analyses of election coverage have shown that major networks devoted significantly more airtime to scandals involving Republican candidates than Democrats, with one study of 2020 U.S. headlines revealing a 2:1 ratio of critical stories targeting the Republican nominee. This pattern extends to areas like , where empirical content audits indicate underreporting of data contradicting prevailing left-leaning interpretations, such as rising rates post-2020 defunding movements. Such biases are attributed to the ideological homogeneity of newsrooms, where surveys of journalists reveal self-identification as liberal by margins exceeding 4:1 in major U.S. markets, fostering an that prioritizes narratives over balanced empirical scrutiny. From progressive and left-wing perspectives, news media faces accusations of corporate capture, where ownership by conglomerates like those controlling or leads to softened scrutiny of business interests, environmental deregulation, and wealth inequality. Critics point to uneven coverage of corporate scandals, with studies showing that environmental violations by major firms receive less prominence than individual , often due to advertiser pressures or shared elite networks. For example, during the , media outlets underplayed industry despite internal documents revealing deception on impacts, prioritizing access to sources over adversarial reporting. This structural bias, progressives argue, results in undercoverage of systemic issues like labor exploitation, as revenue models incentivize over investigative depth into power concentrations that transcend party lines. Libertarian and centrist voices highlight biases toward consensus and , critiquing news for amplifying government narratives on while downplaying civil liberties erosions, such as expansions post-9/11. Quantitative reviews of headline sentiment from 2012–2022 across cable and broadcast outlets demonstrate growing ideological polarization, with domestic political stories skewing more negatively toward non-incumbent or positions regardless of party. These critics, drawing on economic models of media incentives, contend that profit-driven gatekeeping favors conflict over nuance, eroding as audiences perceive distortions in topics like economic reporting, where optimistic GDP forecasts during downturns align with advertiser interests. Empirical surveys confirm that such perceived biases reduce trust across demographics, with conservatives reporting via shaming language in coverage, while independents decry the homogenization of narratives amid media consolidation. Academic influences exacerbate these divides, as education in U.S. universities shows overrepresentation of left-leaning faculty—ratios up to 12:1 in communications departments—correlating with graduates embedding ideological priors in reporting standards. This upstream bias, per mechanism studies, persists because academic outputs face weaker market corrections than commercial news, allowing unchecked propagation of frameworks that privilege certain causal interpretations over data-driven alternatives. Overall, diverse critiques underscore that while no monolithic exists, intersecting incentives—ideological, economic, and institutional—undermine news credibility, with from content analyses affirming detectable slants that vary by outlet but aggregate toward left-leaning defaults in Western mainstream .

Global News Dynamics

Flows and Imbalances in Coverage

Global news flows exhibit structural imbalances, with the majority of international reporting originating from and prioritizing events in Western nations, particularly the United States and Europe. Major wire services such as the Associated Press (AP), Reuters, Agence France-Presse (AFP), and United Press International (UPI), all headquartered in Western countries, supply over 80% of the foreign news consumed by media outlets worldwide, creating a dependency for non-Western publishers on these agencies for global content. This dominance stems from historical factors including colonial legacies, superior technological infrastructure, and economic resources enabling extensive correspondent networks in high-interest regions, rather than deliberate exclusion, though it results in underrepresentation of routine developments in the Global South. Empirical analyses confirm that coverage volumes correlate with a country's , population size, and elite status within the , leading to disproportionate attention to core nations. For instance, studies of international news in U.S. and European outlets show that events in developing countries receive attention primarily during crises like conflicts or disasters, comprising less than 10-15% of total foreign news space in many samples from the late 20th to early 21st centuries, with qualitative framing often emphasizing negative such as or . This pattern persists into the digital era, where online news aggregators and social platforms amplify Western-sourced content due to algorithmic preferences for high-engagement material from established networks, exacerbating qualitative imbalances like the scarcity of nuanced reporting on African or Latin American governance successes. Regional disparities are evident in specific domains; for example, coverage of global disasters in major newspapers displays geographic , with events in wealthier nations receiving 2-3 times more articles than equivalent impacts in poorer regions, attributable to access, cultural proximity, and perceived relevance to domestic audiences. Non-Western media, such as China's Xinhua or Russia's , have expanded but capture under 20% of global syndication shares, limited by language barriers and trust deficits among international subscribers, thus failing to fully counterbalance the flow. These imbalances, while rooted in market-driven efficiencies, can distort global perceptions by marginalizing alternative narratives from peripheral states, though rising multipolarity via platforms like Al Jazeera and RT introduces partial diversification without overturning the core-periphery dynamic.

Variations in Press Freedom and Control

Press freedom exhibits stark variations globally, primarily driven by political systems, legal protections, and economic dependencies, as quantified by the (RSF) World Press Freedom Index, which assesses 180 countries across political, economic, legislative, sociocultural, and safety contexts. In the 2025 edition, the index recorded an unprecedented low in economic indicators, reflecting how financial pressures exacerbate vulnerabilities, with over half the world's population residing in 36 countries classified in "problematic" or worse situations. These disparities correlate strongly with democratic governance, where independent judiciaries and low enable robust media environments, contrasted against authoritarian controls that prioritize state narratives. Countries scoring highest, such as and , benefit from constitutional safeguards, funded without editorial interference, and minimal violence against reporters, fostering diverse outlets with high public trust. Empirical data from the (CPJ) shows these nations report near-zero imprisonments of journalists annually, allowing investigative reporting on government misconduct without reprisal. In contrast, low-ranking nations like and enforce systemic controls through of media, internet firewalls, and punitive laws; alone held 127 journalists in as of 2024, per CPJ records, enabling narratives aligned with directives while suppressing dissent on topics like or origins. Russia's 2022 "fake news" legislation criminalizing independent coverage led to over 30 media closures and exile of outlets like , illustrating how wartime pretexts justify censorship. Economic factors amplify controls in hybrid regimes, such as , where oligarchs aligned with President Erdoğan dominate 90% of media ownership, inducing ; RSF noted 47 s jailed there in 2024 amid economic leverage over advertisers. Violence remains a key suppressor, with CPJ documenting 72 journalist killings in 2024, concentrated in Gaza (over 100 since October 2023), (targeted by cartels), and , where impunity rates exceed 90% due to weak enforcement. Even established democracies show erosion: the fell to 57th in 2025, its lowest ever, attributed to legal threats like SLAPP suits and polarized , though it retains far greater pluralism than autocracies. These patterns underscore causal links between institutional independence and media viability, with RSF's methodology—drawing from expert questionnaires and quantitative data—corroborated by cross-checks against CPJ and metrics, despite critiques of NGO biases toward Western norms.
CategoryExample Countries (2025 RSF Index)Key Indicators
Highest Freedom, , Strong legal protections, low violence (0-1 CPJ cases/year), diverse ownership
Lowest Freedom, , State monopoly, high imprisonments (100+ in China), total
Declining Democracies (57th), Economic pressures, legal harassment, rising impunity (e.g., 8 US killings since 2018)

Non-Western and Alternative Narratives

Non-Western news media, frequently state-supported or regionally focused, articulate narratives that emphasize , multipolarity, and critiques of Western interventionism, often diverging sharply from dominant Anglo-American perspectives. Russia's RT and Sputnik, launched in and respectively, reach over 100 million monthly viewers globally and frame events such as the 2022 invasion of as a defensive response to expansion and alleged bioweapon labs, narratives dismissed in Western outlets but resonating in parts of the Global South where historical U.S. interventions foster skepticism of Atlanticist accounts. Similarly, China's CGTN and , with audiences exceeding 200 million, promote Belt and Road achievements and reject Western allegations on as fabrications rooted in strategies, citing UN visits that found no evidence while highlighting economic data like 8.1% GDP growth in 2021 amid claims. In the and , outlets like Qatar's Al Jazeera and South Africa's Independent Media Group provide granular coverage of local conflicts, such as the Israel- war, foregrounding Palestinian casualties—over 41,000 reported by Gaza health authorities as of October 2024—and effects often downplayed in U.S. media, attributing escalations to settlement expansions rather than solely actions. These narratives gain empirical traction; surveys indicate 62% of respondents in 20 non-Western countries view as biased on international affairs, per 2023 data, driving shifts toward BRICS-aligned reporting that prioritizes economic cooperation over liberal democratic norms. Alternative narratives, disseminated via decentralized platforms like Telegram and independent networks, amplify dissident voices evading state or corporate controls, as evidenced by the 2023 Institute report documenting a 20% rise in non-journalist influencers covering on social video, often contesting mainstream causal attributions—e.g., attributing Ukraine aid failures to data from leaked documents rather than Russian resilience alone. While these channels foster pluralism, analyses reveal propensities for distortion, with 40% of alternative sites exhibiting ideological per 2024 studies, underscoring the need for cross-verification against primary data like or statistics to discern factual kernels from agenda-driven spins. Such dynamics challenge the unipolar , compelling audiences to triangulate sources for causal realism amid polarized ecosystems.

Consumption and Access Patterns

Traditional vs Digital Platforms

In the United States, traditional platforms such as television, radio, and print newspapers have seen substantial declines in regular usage by 2025, with only 11% of adults reporting frequent consumption from radio and 7% from printed newspapers or magazines. In contrast, digital platforms, including and online video, have become primary sources, with 54% of Americans accessing through and video networks, surpassing television for the first time. This shift reflects broader global trends, where social video consumption rose to 65% across surveyed markets by 2025, up from 52% in 2020, driven by platforms offering instant, algorithm-curated content. Access to news via digital platforms has expanded reach for connected populations but exacerbated inequalities due to the , with approximately 2.6 billion people worldwide lacking as of 2024, primarily in low-income and rural areas. Traditional platforms, particularly broadcast and radio, maintain advantages in universal without requiring personal devices or , enabling broader penetration in regions with limited digital infrastructure, such as parts of and . In high-income countries like the U.S., however, 86% of adults obtain news through digital devices, highlighting how traditional media's reliance on fixed schedules and physical distribution limits its competitiveness against digital's on-demand model. Consumption patterns differ markedly in format and duration: U.S. adults devote roughly eight hours daily to —double the time spent on traditional formats—facilitating fragmented, mobile-first engagement via apps and feeds. Digital platforms enable personalized feeds and real-time updates, contrasting with traditional media's structured broadcasts and deeper, edited reporting, though the former's brevity often prioritizes virality over verification. Demographically, younger users under 35 overwhelmingly favor digital sources, with over 70% in many markets relying on social video, while older cohorts retain higher traditional usage, sustaining a hybrid ecosystem amid declining overall trust in both. Younger demographics exhibit a pronounced shift toward digital and platforms for news consumption, diverging sharply from older groups who favor traditional outlets. In the United States, 44% of adults aged 18-24 report and video networks as their primary news sources, compared to lower reliance among those over 30. Similarly, 43% of U.S. adults under 30 regularly obtain news from , a platform with minimal penetration among those 65 and older, where traditional broadcast and print media remain dominant. This age-based bifurcation reflects broader behavioral patterns, with younger users prioritizing short-form video content and algorithmic feeds over structured , leading to higher exposure to user-generated and influencer-driven narratives. Gender differences influence platform preferences within digital news ecosystems. Women are more likely than men to regularly access news via platforms like , while men show greater engagement with sites such as for informational content. Education levels correlate with consumption volume and selectivity; individuals with degrees tend to consult multiple sources daily and exhibit higher trust in established outlets, whereas those with lower favor aggregates, often resulting in fragmented or echo-chambered exposure. Across demographics, overall engagement has stagnated or declined for traditional media, with only 7% of U.S. adults frequently turning to printed newspapers in 2025, down amid the rise of on-demand digital alternatives. Behavioral trends underscore a move toward convenience-driven habits, including incidental news discovery via social feeds rather than deliberate seeking. Approximately 53% of U.S. adults encounter news at least occasionally through , stable from prior years but indicative of passive consumption patterns that amplify viral content over in-depth reporting. Younger cohorts, in particular, display shorter attention spans for news, favoring bite-sized formats that prioritize value, which correlates with lower verification of sources compared to older, more methodical users. These patterns contribute to uneven information diets, where demographic silos—exacerbated by platform algorithms—foster selective exposure aligned with preexisting views rather than broad-spectrum awareness.

Psychological Impacts on Audiences

Exposure to negative or distressing news content has been empirically linked to immediate increases in anxiety and among audiences. For instance, even brief exposure to negatively valenced news, such as 15-minute video clips, elevates anxious and sad moods post-consumption. This effect stems from the hedonic negativity of news, where consumption—particularly of hard news focused on conflict or crises—reduces overall mental by inducing unpleasant emotional experiences, as differentiated from softer, less conflict-oriented content in experimental designs. During heightened news cycles, such as the , daily exposure to distressing media correlated with worsened outcomes, including elevated anxiety, depression, and , independent of the event's actual severity. amplification of such news further intensified these responses, with studies showing that repeated negative headlines on platforms like induced measurable declines in emotional states and . Media-induced , a core mechanism, triggers distress by fostering perceptions of uncontrollability and , as evidenced in narrative reviews of non-traumatic news effects on emotional regulation. News consumption also contributes to cognitive and social psychological effects, including heightened polarization. Framing of social issues in news messages has produced partisan divergences in opinions, with Republicans and Democrats showing increased opinion gaps after exposure to determinant-focused coverage. Reports emphasizing societal polarization exacerbate affective polarization by inflating audience perceptions of intergroup divides, thereby reinforcing partisan animus over time. Political news saturation, pervasive in daily life, compounds these issues by seeping into non-political domains and eroding through , though disengagement risks information gaps. Overload from constant negative news drives selective avoidance or curation strategies, yet sustains engagement cycles that perpetuate emotional fatigue. Experimental evidence indicates that negative news exposure heightens and intolerance, altering under in ways that mirror real-world behavioral shifts post-media consumption. These patterns underscore a causal pathway from media habits to psychological strain, with longitudinal data revealing transactional dynamics where issue fatigue from news loops back to amplify distress.

Societal Roles and Effects

Contributions to Democracy and Cohesion

has demonstrably enhanced democratic by exposing and prompting legal action. A 2023 study analyzing U.S. federal judicial found that the establishment of nonprofit outlets correlated with a significant increase in public prosecutions, rising by approximately 10% in districts gaining such coverage compared to those without. Similarly, cross-national research indicates that higher press freedom reduces in business-state interactions, as measured by firm-level surveys across 76 countries, with freer media environments linked to lower bribe payments and fewer irregular payments for contracts. These effects stem from media's capacity to disseminate evidence of malfeasance, mobilizing public and institutional responses that deter future abuses. Local news outlets contribute to electoral participation and oversight of officials. Empirical analysis shows that access to local journalism boosts voter turnout by providing district-specific information, countering national partisan influences and encouraging accountability to constituents rather than party elites. In the United States, areas with robust local reporting exhibit higher civic efficacy and reduced polarization in local governance, as residents gain verifiable insights into policy impacts. A 2024 Pew Research Center survey revealed that 76% of Americans believe news media scrutiny prevents politicians from wrongdoing, underscoring public recognition of this watchdog function despite broader trust declines. Media freedom correlates with broader democratic stability and . Quantitative studies across democracies link greater media openness to improved efficiency, reduced militarized disputes, and stronger institutional checks, controlling for economic and political variables. UNESCO's 2024 analysis of global journalism affirms that high-quality reporting fosters by delivering accurate information that informs policy debates and holds power accountable, though outcomes depend on journalistic independence from state or corporate influence. Regarding social cohesion, can provide a shared informational foundation that enables collective deliberation, though is more limited and context-dependent than for effects. Quality promotes common understanding of societal issues by verifying facts and facilitating , as seen in models that emphasize balanced coverage to bridge divides. In stable democracies, exposure to diverse news sources has been associated with higher interpersonal trust and tolerance in experimental settings, countering insularity when outlets prioritize evidence over . However, these benefits accrue primarily from traditional platforms emphasizing verification, rather than fragmented digital chambers that undermine unity.

Amplification of Influence and Agenda-Setting

Agenda-setting theory describes how news media influence public priorities not by dictating specific opinions, but by determining which issues receive prominence through selection, repetition, and emphasis in coverage. Formulated by Maxwell McCombs and Donald Shaw, the theory emerged from their analysis of the 1968 U.S. presidential election, where they found correlations as high as 0.97 between the issue agendas of major media outlets like The New York Times and Time magazine and voter surveys identifying key national concerns, such as foreign policy and domestic unrest. This empirical foundation demonstrated that media exposure shapes what audiences perceive as salient, with heavier coverage amplifying perceived importance independent of the content's inherent gravity. Amplification mechanisms include volume of reporting, positional prominence (e.g., front-page or lead stories), and cross-media echo effects, which sustain attention and elevate issues from niche to dominant discourse. Studies confirm that fluctuations in news coverage predict shifts in public opinion polls; for example, increased reporting on economic inequality from 2010 to 2016 correlated with its rise as a top voter priority in Gallup surveys, rising from 20% to over 50% of respondents naming it a key problem. In policy arenas, this influence manifests as agenda-melding, where media-driven public salience prompts legislative responses, as seen in heightened congressional focus on topics like immigration following sustained coverage spikes in the early 2010s. However, amplification is selective: gatekeeping processes—where editors prioritize stories based on newsworthiness criteria—often result in underrepresentation of dissenting or peripheral views, skewing the informational landscape. Critiques of agenda-setting highlight its vulnerability to institutional biases in , which empirical reviews attribute to systemic selection preferences favoring narratives aligned with elite or progressive consensus, such as disproportionate emphasis on (averaging 4% of U.S. broadcast time from 2017-2020 despite varied public metrics) over concerns. This has fueled declining trust, with Gallup polls recording U.S. media confidence at a record low of 28% in 2025, partly due to perceptions of favoritism in 79% of coverage on political issues. While alternative outlets mitigate some imbalances, dominant platforms retain outsized agenda-setting power, raising causal concerns about distorted public prioritization and policy responsiveness in polarized environments.

Propagation of Misinformation and Propaganda

News media outlets have historically served as conduits for and , often through uncritical amplification of official narratives or selective framing that aligns with institutional interests. refers to false or inaccurate information disseminated without intent to deceive, while involves deliberate falsehoods, and entails systematic efforts to shape via biased or manipulative messaging. Empirical analyses indicate that competitive pressures in exacerbate this propagation, as outlets prioritize speed and virality over verification, leading to the rapid spread of unverified claims across traditional and digital platforms. A key mechanism involves reliance on elite sources, such as government officials or corporate entities, which filters content through a "" where ownership concentration, advertising dependencies, and sourcing flak incentivize narratives favoring powerful actors over dissenting views. For instance, during the lead-up to the 2003 , major U.S. outlets like and extensively reported unsubstantiated claims of weapons of mass destruction based on anonymous intelligence sources, later debunked, contributing to public support for invasion despite lacking empirical corroboration. This pattern reflects systemic biases, including ideological alignment in newsrooms—where surveys show overrepresentation of left-leaning journalists—which can embed partisan framing, such as downplaying certain policy failures while amplifying others, thereby sustaining misperceptions. Studies quantify the scale: a PNAS of online diffusion found that spreads faster than factual reporting due to novelty and emotional , with news aggregators and headlines amplifying low-credibility content to six times the of truth in some networks. In non-Western contexts, state-controlled media like China's Xinhua routinely propagate narratives denying Uyghur detentions or origins, blending factual reporting with omission and fabrication to maintain regime legitimacy, as documented in cross-national content audits. Western , while less overtly state-directed, exhibit analogous issues through "manufactured consent," where advertiser-friendly content and propagate economic orthodoxies, such as uncritically endorsing policies amid data manipulations. Countermeasures like mitigate but do not eliminate propagation, as psychological drivers— and affective polarization—lead audiences to discount corrections that challenge priors, per meta-analyses of over 50 experiments. Moreover, algorithmic curation on news sites reinforces echo chambers, where users encounter reinforcing , reducing exposure to corrective by up to 70% in polarized environments. These dynamics underscore journalism's dual role: while intended as a truth arbiter, structural incentives often transform it into a vector for distorted realities, eroding epistemic foundations when biases override evidence-based .

Controversies and Reforms

Fake News and Verification Challenges

refers to fabricated or deliberately misleading information presented in the form of legitimate news reports, often designed to deceive audiences and influence . This phenomenon predates the digital era but proliferated significantly after the 2016 U.S. presidential election and referendum, where platforms enabled rapid dissemination of false claims about electoral processes and candidates. Empirical analyses indicate that typically exploits emotional appeals or to maximize shares, with studies showing that misleading content spreads six times faster than accurate information on platforms like (now X). Verification challenges arise primarily from the asymmetry between the velocity of diffusion and the time required for rigorous . Social media algorithms prioritize engagement metrics, amplifying emotionally charged or novel content—often false—over factual accuracy, as human attention biases favor such material. For instance, a 2023 study found that algorithmic recommendations on platforms like direct users toward increasingly polarized and misleading videos, exacerbating echo chambers where verification is bypassed. organizations, such as or , face scalability issues, with corrections often reaching only 10-20% of the original audience due to delayed publication and lower virality of rebuttals. Moreover, these entities exhibit partisan tendencies; analyses reveal that fact-checks disproportionately target conservative claims, with left-leaning outlets receiving fewer ratings despite comparable error rates in reporting on topics like origins or the 2020 Hunter Biden laptop story. Emerging technologies compound these difficulties, including AI-generated deepfakes and that mimic authentic footage, as seen in fabricated videos of public figures during the 2024 U.S. elections that evaded initial detection. Prevalence data underscores the scale: between 2020 and 2025, approximately 40% of shared content was estimated to be false or misleading, with 86% of global users exposed to such material weekly. Traditional media outlets, often insulated by institutional trust, have propagated unverified narratives—such as the 2016 allegations against , later discredited—which mainstream verification processes failed to challenge promptly due to ideological alignment. Cognitive biases among verifiers, including , further hinder objectivity, as fact-checkers tend to underrate claims aligning with their worldview. Efforts to mitigate these issues include platform-side interventions like algorithmic of flagged content and public on source evaluation, yet shows mixed ; prebunking interventions reduced susceptibility by 20-30% in controlled trials, but real-world remains low. Independent verification tools, such as cross-referencing primary or blockchain-based provenance tracking, offer promise but struggle against adversarial tactics like coordinated bot networks, which amplified false claims during the 2022 Ukraine conflict by orders of magnitude. Ultimately, systemic biases in academic and journalistic institutions—where left-leaning perspectives dominate—undermine neutral verification, as studies document underreporting of errors in aligned narratives, necessitating diversified, transparent methodologies to restore credibility.

Declining Trust and Public Skepticism

in has reached historic lows in recent years, with a Gallup poll conducted in September 2025 revealing that only 28% of express a great deal or fair amount of confidence in newspapers, television, and radio to report the news fully, accurately, and fairly, marking the lowest level recorded since tracking began in 1972. This figure represents a sharp decline from 72% in 1976 and reflects a broader trend where trust has hovered below 40% since 2015, exacerbated by partisan gaps—only 12% of Republicans report high trust compared to 54% of Democrats. Globally, the Institute Digital News Report 2025 indicates average trust in news at 40%, stable for the third consecutive year but insufficient to foster broad public engagement, with traditional outlets facing particular amid rising digital alternatives. Several factors contribute to this erosion, including perceptions of institutional and commercial pressures overriding journalistic integrity. Surveys highlight that audiences cite media negativity, selective reporting, and prioritization of financial interests over factual accuracy as key drivers; for instance, 90% of those with low emotional trust in national news believe organizations favor profits over . Polarization amplifies these concerns, as the proliferation of online sources allows audiences to detect inconsistencies between coverage and personal observations, fostering a cycle where mainstream outlets are viewed as agenda-driven rather than neutral. In the U.S., this has led to widespread skepticism, with Pew Research noting that declining trust correlates with increased reliance on self-directed verification via search engines, though such practices can inadvertently heighten vulnerability to unvetted claims. Public skepticism manifests in behavioral shifts, such as avoidance of news consumption and preference for peer-sourced or alternative platforms perceived as less biased. The Edelman Trust Barometer 2025 attributes part of the distrust to a pervasive sense of grievance, where media coverage of social and political unrest is seen as inflammatory or unbalanced, eroding confidence across demographics. Generational divides are evident, with younger adults under 30 showing trust levels as low as 20% in some metrics, compared to 43% among those 65 and older, signaling long-term challenges for media legitimacy. Despite these trends, pockets of trust persist in outlets emphasizing transparency and verification, underscoring that skepticism stems not from inherent public cynicism but from repeated empirical failures in delivering unbiased, comprehensive reporting.

Debates on Regulation and Self-Correction

Proponents of regulatory measures for news media contend that government oversight is essential to mitigate the spread of misinformation and propaganda, which can undermine public discourse and democratic processes. For instance, concentrated media ownership has been linked to amplified political propaganda, prompting calls for structural regulations to diversify voices and enforce accountability. In the European Union, the Digital Services Act (DSA), effective from 2024, mandates online platforms to enhance transparency in content moderation and reporting of illegal content, indirectly influencing news outlets by requiring risk assessments for systemic issues like disinformation during elections. Advocates, including EU regulators, argue these rules protect users without unduly restricting journalistic content, which is exempted from certain obligations to preserve media pluralism. Opponents of government regulation emphasize risks to press freedom, asserting that state intervention could enable and chill investigative reporting. In the United States, of the of 1996 grants platforms immunity from liability for user-generated content, including news shared online, but reform proposals—debated in as of 2023—face criticism for potentially overburdening small outlets and favoring incumbent platforms. Surveys indicate broad American preference against federal regulation of , with 59% favoring platform self-policing of unverified information over government mandates, reflecting concerns that official controls could suppress dissenting views. Critics, including free speech advocates, warn that regulations like the DSA's emergency powers for crisis could extend to news narratives, prioritizing state-defined "harm" over empirical verification. Self-correction mechanisms within news organizations, such as internal codes, public , and protocols, are defended as preferable alternatives that foster without external coercion. Major outlets like and maintain ombudsmen or standards editors to review errors, with issued for factual inaccuracies— for example, over 1,000 retractions tracked annually across U.S. media via resources like Regret the Error. These processes embody journalism's "recursive" capacity to learn from mistakes, as outlined in analyses of press freedom, where transparency in admitting errors builds long-term credibility more effectively than imposed penalties. However, empirical studies highlight limitations, such as delayed reaching only 10-20% of original audiences due to digital dissemination patterns, prompting debates on whether market-driven incentives alone suffice amid declining ad revenues pressuring . Industry bodies like the advocate voluntary adherence to codes emphasizing truth-seeking over regulatory fixes, though skeptics note uneven application influenced by institutional biases. Recent developments underscore ongoing tensions, with U.S. Department of Justice reviews in 2020 recommending targeted tweaks for "" actors without broad overhauls, yet legislative inaction persists amid First Amendment concerns. In contrast, enforcement actions under the DSA, including 2025 probes into platforms like Meta for transparency failures, signal a co-regulatory model blending with fines up to 6% of global revenue, raising questions about extraterritorial effects on international news flows. Advocates for self-supervision argue that platforms and news entities should prioritize algorithmic audits and user feedback loops, as voluntary initiatives have reduced certain spreads by 15-30% in controlled studies, though causal attribution remains contested due to confounding variables like user behavior. These debates reflect a causal reality: while regulation may curb acute harms, it risks entrenching power imbalances, whereas robust self-correction demands cultural shifts toward empirical rigor over narrative conformity.

Emerging Developments

Rise of Citizen and Influencer Journalism

The proliferation of smartphones and platforms in the early enabled ordinary individuals to capture and disseminate real-time eyewitness accounts, marking the ascent of as a parallel to professional reporting. Events such as the 2010 Arab Spring uprisings exemplified this shift, where participants in and used and to document protests and government responses, often providing footage unavailable through state-controlled outlets. Similarly, during the 2010 Haiti earthquake, citizen-submitted videos and photos via platforms like supplied initial on-the-ground details before international crews arrived. This approach challenged the monopoly of traditional media by accelerating information flow and incorporating perspectives from non-elite sources. By the mid-2010s, expanded with widespread adoption of mobile video recording, contributing to coverage of movements like in 2011 and the 2014 Ferguson protests, where live streams on platforms such as and bypassed delayed broadcast cycles. In conflict zones, including the 2012 Gaza-Israel hostilities, residents tweeted coordinates of rocket strikes and explosions, enabling rapid mapping by analysts. Quantitative growth is evident in usage data: as of 2025, approximately 53% of U.S. adults obtain news from at least occasionally, with platforms facilitating that often precedes formal verification. This modality has proven particularly effective in underreported locales, where professional access is restricted, though it demands scrutiny for accuracy absent institutional checks. Parallel to citizen efforts, influencer journalism emerged prominently in the late , characterized by content creators with substantial online followings who analyze and report on current events through podcasts, videos, and posts, often drawing audiences disillusioned with legacy media's editorial filters. Figures on and , for instance, have amassed millions of subscribers by offering unscripted commentary on political developments, with platforms like X (formerly ) amplifying real-time threads from influencers during events such as the 2020 U.S. elections. Surveys indicate this trend's scale: 21% of American adults regularly consume news from influencers as of late 2024, rising to 22% among younger demographics who prioritize relatable, platform-native delivery over televised segments. The synergy between citizen inputs and influencer curation has reshaped news dynamics, with overtaking traditional television and websites as the primary U.S. news source by mid-2025, driven by algorithmic promotion of viral eyewitness clips and expert breakdowns. Influencers, leveraging personal brands built on transparency and direct , often integrate citizen footage into narratives, fostering niche communities around topics like policy critiques or local crises that mainstream outlets underemphasize. This evolution reflects a causal shift toward decentralized verification via feedback and cross-posting, though it underscores ongoing tensions with professional standards, as influencers rarely adhere to uniform protocols. By 2025, such practices have normalized alternative pathways for agenda-setting, particularly in polarized contexts where trust in established institutions wanes.

AI Integration in Production and Distribution

Artificial intelligence has increasingly been integrated into news production workflows to automate routine tasks and enhance efficiency, with adoption accelerating in 2024 and 2025. News organizations employ AI for data analysis, content summarization, and automated reporting, particularly in domains like financial and sports results where structured data predominates. For instance, the has utilized AI since 2014 to generate thousands of quarterly earnings stories annually, a practice expanded in subsequent years to include pilot programs for story summarization that condense articles into key points for rapid reader consumption. Similarly, applies AI to analyze large datasets, draft headlines and summaries, and facilitate translations, thereby streamlining editorial processes without replacing human oversight. Surveys indicate that over 80% of journalists in surveyed regions incorporate AI tools into their work, often for monitoring sources, transcribing audio, and initial drafting, though many newsrooms lack formal policies governing its use. In content creation, generative AI models assist with ideation and optimization, such as generating headlines tailored for digital platforms or curating stories based on audience . Tools like AI-powered chatbots enable real-time summarization from diverse sources, including and wire services, reducing manual labor in newsgathering. However, AI's reliance on drawn from existing news corpora introduces risks of propagating biases inherent in those sources, as large models often reflect the predominant viewpoints in datasets, which empirical analyses have shown skew toward left-leaning perspectives on contentious issues. Productivity gains are evident, with AI enabling faster workflows; for example, automated transcription and dynamic content adjustment have been cited in industry reports as key efficiency drivers in newsrooms adopting these technologies. For distribution, AI algorithms personalize news feeds and optimize delivery across platforms, using recommendation systems to match content with user preferences derived from behavior data. This includes dynamic paywalls that adjust access based on reader engagement metrics and AI-driven curation for apps and newsletters, as implemented by outlets experimenting with tailored summaries via chat interfaces. The global AI market in media, valued at $25.98 billion in 2024, is projected to reach $33.68 billion in 2025, fueled partly by these distribution enhancements that boost reach and retention. Yet, such personalization can amplify echo chambers, prioritizing sensational or algorithm-favored content over balanced reporting, with studies showing reduced trust in AI-assisted news even when accuracy is maintained, as audiences perceive diminished human accountability. In 2025, trends emphasize unified teams leveraging AI toolkits for both production and distribution, aiming to counter declining ad revenues amid these shifts.

Projections for Future Adaptations

News organizations anticipate adapting to persistent economic pressures and technological disruptions by diversifying revenue streams beyond , with 77% prioritizing subscriptions and memberships as primary focuses, supplemented by events (48%) and affiliate revenue (29%). Collective licensing deals with AI and tech companies are favored by 72% of publishers, as 36% project significant income from such arrangements to offset declining search traffic, which concerns 74% due to AI-generated summaries displacing traditional referrals. Integration of generative AI into production workflows is expected to accelerate, with 87% of newsrooms already transformed and plans for widespread applications including back-end (valued by 60%), text-to-audio conversion (75%), AI summaries (70%), and chatbots (56%). These tools aim to enhance efficiency amid job reduction forecasts, as 59% of predict fewer positions over the next two decades from AI displacement. However, public skepticism prevails, with 50% viewing AI's overall impact on news content as negative and 66% expressing high concern over inaccurate outputs, prompting adaptations emphasizing human oversight for verification to mitigate trust erosion. To counter declining engagement with legacy platforms—evident in falling use of TV, print, and news websites—publishers project shifts toward video-centric distribution on platforms like (+52 net score for investment) and (+48), alongside 42% developing youth-oriented products such as games (29%). Personalization via AI is eyed for re-engagement (e.g., 27% audience preference for summaries, 24% for translations), though only 40% global trust in news underscores the need for trusted brands to prioritize amid rising worries (58%). Longer-term forecasts through 2029 indicate consolidation and platform dependencies, with hyperscale social video challenging traditional media's dominance and necessitating bolder AI adoption for , balanced against regulatory debates on transparency. Confidence in journalism's viability has dipped to 41% among executives, from 60% in 2022, signaling adaptations centered on talent retention in (55% concern) and (52%) to sustain .

References

Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.