Brand and trust in a fragmented news environment
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
3 likes•1,632 views
The document summarizes key findings from qualitative research on how brand and trust operate in fragmented news environments. It found that while platforms fit into different consumption routines, brands remain an important vehicle for trust. Brand visibility varies across distributed platforms. The importance of social media sharers depends on the situation. Views on algorithms versus editors are mixed, and some are unaware of algorithms. Overall, people want established news brands to continue providing trusted news into the future.
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (7)
Similar to Brand and trust in a fragmented news environment
Similar to Brand and trust in a fragmented news environment (20)
More from Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, Oxford University
More from Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, Oxford University (6)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (14)
Brand and trust in a fragmented news environment
- 1. RESEARCH PRESENTATION Hosted by BBC, 11th October BRAND AND TRUST IN A FRAGMENTED NEWS ENVIRONMENT James Montgomery, Director of Digital Development,
- 2. Rise of distributed media 2 Average across 26 countries 51% % USE SOCIAL MEDIA FOR NEWS OTHER AGGREGATORS APPLE NEWS SNAPCHAT DISCOVER GOOGLE ACCELERATED PAGES
- 3. Impact on brand recognition Q10b/cii_2016. Thinking about when you have used social media/aggregators for news, typically how often do you notice the news brand that has supplied the content? Notice = those who always or mostly notice the brand 3
- 5. Brand and trust in a fragmented news environment Qualitative research conducted for the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, University of Oxford Jason Vir, Director, Kantar Media
- 6. 6
- 7. • News and platforms • Brand perceptions • Trust in news • Distributed environments • Speculation on the future The story 7
- 8. 8
- 9. What is news? information knowledge education discovery updates ongoing issues current events new developments what happened weather alerts sports scores what it means analysis way of keeping in touch news is produced reality in a package entertainment brings us together something to talk about SOCIAL VALUE HAS A STRUCTUREBEYOND FACTSRAW FACTS EVOLVINGTOPICS PERSONAL VALUE form of company can be manufactured? explanation facts spin? opinion 9
- 10. Deprivation exercise: a day without digital news sources No digital = missing out, feeling detached Noticed how much news habits are changing Enjoy bite size simplification But also, no digital = relief from information overload US, 35-54 UK, 20-34 10
- 11. How is news consumed? UK, 35-54 US, 20-34 News is ubiquitous, particularly with the rise of connected devices and apps Multiple sources and platforms allow people to navigate news stories both actively and passively There’s a cycle through the day and the week (ES: lunchtime peak as well as evening) Consuming news at the weekend is more immersive and relaxing, less time pressured Digital is eroding other platforms, esp printed newspapers, and radio to some extent News fits seamlessly into day-to-day life 11
- 12. Comparing platforms TV PRINT NEWSPAPER NEWS WEBSITE SOCIAL MEDIA Easy, entertaining, packaged, available, visual Journalistic, essential, ritualistic, but not up-to-date content Up-to-date, live, convenient, news brand credentials, clickbait Instant, effortless, interactive, mobile, but a minefield 12
- 14. Mapping the online news landscape more tabloid, populist newspapers apps tabloids social media no print, American broadcasters broadsheets newspapers online broadcasters news aggregators, more tailored amateur news, first person accounts, opinions Traditional print brands more salient among older 14 35-5420-34
- 15. Brand perceptions “BBC would probably be the one I go to… get to the facts about what’s going on.” 20-34, UK “That’s like Celebrity Big Brother – all about celebrities.” 35-54, UK “[Buzzfeed] doesn’t take itself too seriously.” 20-34, UK “They’re funny. They do some prank things.” 35-54, UK “It’s good for keeping up to date … if you’re actually following a story. Whereas, you watch the mainstream news on TV… the next day that’s gone.” 35-54, UK “I like it because… you also get like your celebrity gossip… health, fitness, lifestyle tips, sport, shopping, fashion, everything!” 20-34, UK 15
- 16. Mapping the online news landscape social media – not designed for news online newspapers / news magazines aggregators major players, mostly TV social media – interactive established news brands conservative liberal online newspapers Market less clear among older print heritage? human interest non-print 16 35-54 20-34
- 17. Brand perceptions “Great reputation, sometimes boring.” 20-34, US “Huffington Post feels like a blog to me.” 35-54, US “And it’s not serious… Kim Kardashian’s new clothes – I don’t care!” 35-54, US “It’s just a party.” 35-54, US “Oh my god, I used to take personality quizzes, like which character from Glee are you… so I try to avoid it.” 20-34, US 17
- 18. Perceptions and role of brands Native digital brands not as well known, esp among older and less tech engaged Print heritage further segmented by editorial approach Largely perceived along traditional platform lines Repertoire of news brands 18
- 20. Trust in news Examining the refugee/immigration story for trust factors 20
- 21. 21
- 22. Coherence across multiple sources helps build trust Trust a favoured news brand Triangulation – sources corroborate the story Headlines, images, tone can stir strong emotions Cautious of strong opinions on social media Good track record and past experiences First person accounts via social media Wary of political agenda DE: getting full story? (e.g. NYE assaults) 22
- 23. What is trust in news content? facts objectivity transparency accuracy impartial balance not biased capability well researched reporters in the field own investigation integrity honesty authentic how deal with mistakes plurality multiple sources validation triangulation experience consistent track record good history reliable familiar reporting style follow parents’ habits word of mouth recommendation sincere genuine tonality power of language power of visuals emotion trust in news content 23
- 24. Trust in news content ACCURACY IMPARTIALITY CAPABILITY EXPERIENCE INTEGRITY PLURALITY News content The product News organisation The provider News organisation’s values User responsibility TONALITY 24
- 25. What generates mistrust? • Sensationalism • Suppression • Dissonance • Commercial interests • Click bait • Errors and inaccuracies “And you also have to highlight the negative sides. It’s a lot of opinion-making and also censorship that’s happening and you always have to be careful.” 20-34, DE “Sensationalist journalism. And how the story is written, sometimes it's pitiful.” 35-54, ES “I mean the media is still responsible to its advertisers, be it television or website or print. I mean there’s kind of certain lines that they might not cross because they don’t want to put off their advertisers or even their owners.” 20-34, US 25
- 26. Facebook Flipboard Facebook Flipboard Facebook Apple News FacebookApple News 26
- 27. How different groups use social media “I still watch the news once a day Social media and Facebook are rather secondary” GERMANY 50+ OLDER “In the refugee crisis I got a lot of my news through Facebook, blogs, videos from the camps” UK 18-34 YOUNGER “When David Bowie died everyone flocked to Facebook so I would find it there, but I don’t think I would click into an article because I don’t feel social media has got integrity UK 35+ “Social media has brought a wonderful community. It has taken the newspaper and the chat room culture and has smashed them together” USA 18-34
- 28. FRIEND/ SHARER SOURCE/ NEWS BRAND STORY/ HEADLINE Trusting in news via social media is more complex A story of interest is the main pull – provided by headline, image Trust resides with established brands with a track record, where brand liked/followed A friend might raise awareness, pique interest – but why shared? A trusted friend can serve as a proxy for an unknown brand Or, popularity might encourage trust – validation of the crowd 1 2 3 28
- 30. Generally, younger and tech engaged more open to algorithm ALGORITHM EDITOR • Human expertise • Accountability • Manageable selection BUT • Agenda • Filter risk • Independent • Tailored • Broader selection BUT • Can produce odd results • Risk of filter bubble • Data concerns (esp DE), targeted ads 30
- 32. 32
- 33. Conclusions 1. Platforms fit into different routines and help people engage with news stories in different ways 2. Brands are an important vehicle for trust 3. Brands have varied visibility in distributed environments 4. The importance of the sharer of a news story in social media varies 5. Views about editors versus algorithms are mixed, and some are unaware of the latter 6. People are keen for established, trusted news brands to continue well into the future 33
- 34. Brand and trust in a fragmented news environment Qualitative research conducted for the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, University of Oxford Jason Vir, Director, Kantar Media
- 35. Rasmus Nielsen Director of Research, Reuters Institute Q&A Jason Vir, James Montgomery,
Editor's Notes
- We’ve really hit a landmark this year with over half of our global sample (51%) saying that they now social media as a source of news at least once a week And as you can see from the chart of the left in most country that represents enormous growth since 2013 – in most countries pretty much doubling (Spain 28-60% at the top), US 27-46%, even Japan almost doubling in 4 years
- So the big question is does it matter if news is increasingly accessed via intermediaries like SNs and aggregators – does it weaken the brand connection and by implication ability to forge direct links with readers . >>>>Well this year we asked if people noticed news brands when in SN or aggregator and we find overall the brand tends to get noticed less than half the time – a bit more in Germany and the US, a bit less in UK, Canada – and you can see here in countries like Japan and Korea that have lots of aggregators brand recognition of more like a quarter – perhaps a sign of things to come if this trend continues.
- This issue of trust in journalism is also relevant to the wider debate about debate about distributed content – in terms of whether people trust journalists any more to make the right selections– or actually whether algorithms might be better way of selecting news. >>> We asked this specifically this year (whether algorithms or editors were a good way to select news) and what we found was much more positive attitude to algorithms that take account of what you’ve read before in pretty much every country, then, second, journalists and finally selections based on what friends have read … so this surprised us – that pretty much everywhere algorithms trusted more than editors to be unbiased, produce better selections but when we talked made sense but there was a group of people see danger of algorithms and who think editors better at providing something different.
- Good evening and thank you for coming. This study set out to explore issues of trust in an increasingly fragmented news environment, and specifically within more distributed environments. First, a few words about the methodology: We recruited people with medium/high interest in news; range of sources, brands, devices; m/f, 20-54 split into younger and older We set them a task to complete a news consumption diary for a day & deprived of digital news sources for a day We then ran 8 group discussions plus some follow-up depths across UK (London), US (NY), DE (Hamburg), ES (Madrid) The fieldwork was conducted in February 2016
- We examined trust through different facets of news. Here’s the story I’m going to take you through this evening…
- Think back to February this year. What news was being consumed? UK 20-34: Labour party disagreements | Zika virus | Storm Imogen UK 35-54: Trump | China selling off its reserves | Tories might go for a snap election | Storm Imogen | Rip off energy prices for pensioners US 20-34: Election coverage of Trump and Sanders | Supreme Court Chief Justice Scalia died | Flint MI toxic water disaster | L train will stop running for a year US 35-54: The election | Scalia’s death | The immigration situation | Politician Eliot Spitzer in trouble again | Grammy Awards NEWS AND PLATFORMS So let’s start by considering news and platforms...
- What is news? What did these people consider it to be? It’s something we asked about in the pre-task as well as the discussions
- Deprivation is a powerful way to highlight what is important
- TV is packaged, visual, easy Immersive, sense of direct connection and closeness – can see reactions, body language, environment – strongly emotional Provides packaged synopsis – easy, familiar, punctuates the day Can be on in background – consume passively – also a companion role [Also 24h channels – constant availability] [Social value of discussing stories with others in the room] [Some plurality – can switch between national and international services (DE)] BUT Can be lighter on detail – and repeats across bulletins and rolling news Less control – dictated by schedule/agenda Stance/bias (esp. ES, US) Print newspapers are essence of news Written word can seem more authoritative More control – choose what to read, and at your own pace Provides more detail, and context – wide coverage, helped by supplements Serendipity – come across interesting stories Can provide quiet time, shield from distractions – usefully less emotional than TV Nostalgia value/ luxury (esp. older) BUT Not as up to date, yesterday’s news Requires greater effort UK: not free of stance/bias [Cost – other platforms seem to be free – free papers can seem wasteful] [Ink on hands] News websites make news up-to-date Kept up to date, and can get alerts – customisable Plus credentials of print – authoritative, breadth and depth of coverage Also provides film and some live coverage – like immersive first-hand experience of TV Good for commenting, interacting Offers quick, multiple points of comparison [Convenience, fits well into commuting, can be anywhere] [Generally free] BUT Can be confusing, information overload Lots of useless information/filler – tendency to click-bait style headlines over substance and accuracy [Requires internet connection and battery – some sites require subscription] [Does not fit into usage routines of print – a different experience] Social media are instant, interactive, but a minefield Works well as both active and passive news platform News is always available and easily accessed Multiple sources, different perspectives Can tailor to your interests – can follow individual journalists and first person unmediated as well as news brands Interactive – commenting, sharing, debating, ‘liking’ Can be effective for breaking news, start point [Convenience, minimal effort – news finds me] BUT Clutter and overload, lots of scrolling Have to be careful – risk of distortion, lies, nonsense, propaganda (e.g. by IS) Filtering risks a news bubble Socialised news and comments can become irritating – nasty comments, arguments Ease of access risks feeling addictive, driving compulsive behaviour – can suffer overload [Requires internet connection and battery] [DE: too much personal disclosure, and data privacy concerns]
- BRAND PERCEPTIONS Brand perceptions – brands written on cards and sort through
- Brand perceptions (UK) BBC: Up to date, reliable Accessible, easy to read Baseline information Wide coverage, global stories Mail online: A polarising brand – some unaware of different print brand proposition Wide ranging, celebrity focus Female audience Reporting plus strong opinions Buzzfeed: Entertaining, escapism Click bait – trying to entice with silly stories, ‘20 tips’ pieces A guilty pleasure
- Brand perceptions (US) The New York Times: Long established and reputable More accurate and objective Sections provide wide coverage Older audience A news benchmark The Huffington Post: Innovative, but less serious Less credible – become more populist since bought by AOL? Click bait approach to grab attention Buzzfeed: Entertaining but not really news Good for sharing content Can be a guilty pleasure Social media rather than news heritage
- Perceptions and role of brands – in summary Largely perceived along traditional platform lines Broadcasters, print heritage, news aggregators, social media Print heritage further segmented by editorial approach Entertaining/tabloid vs serious/broadsheet (UK) Political leaning – liberal vs conservative (UK, US), esp among older Native digital brands not as well known, esp among older and less tech engaged Some brands have niche proposition (e.g. entertainment focus, and/or entertaining style) Often fit within a repertoire alongside more established news brands – triangulation role People use a repertoire of news brands Tend to have a preferred source for initial awareness Might follow up elsewhere to verify the news, corroborate the story, get more detail Individual brands have different strengths and roles – across stages of news story evolution, and times of the day, and across different platforms
- Some comments from London on Buzzfeed…
- TRUST IN NEWS We wanted to explore trust through a current story that could be examined across all 4 countries – so we selected the refugee/immigration story to examine for trust factors
- The refugee/immigration story A fraught story – human horror intersecting political difficulties On-going – does not have an easy narrative arc with resolution Encountered in many ways, both actively and passively Many angles, e.g. humanitarian, economic, security/terrorism Reporting of incidents within the wider story can be polarising – e.g. encourage engagement vs disproportionate skewed coverage
- Turn to sources (esp newspapers) with good reputation, track record, had good past experiences for this kind of news Trust a news brand – e.g. the FT presents the facts clearly, and a familiar preferred UK brand Triangulation – try to make sense by using several sources that corroborate the story Follow via Facebook – first person accounts from friends volunteering in Calais (UK, 20-34) Headlines, images, and style/tone of writing can stir strong emotions – attract attention at expense of rounded view? Wary of political agenda – can undermine confidence in brand, so seek out alternatives DE: are we getting the full story? how does reporting impact reaction to events (e.g. NYE assaults)? Cautious of strong opinions shared on social media
- Trust in the news The news content Accuracy and impartiality are the fundamentals of news Tonality facilitates the conveying of news – it can work well, providing clarity and engagement, but can also be a barrier and undermine confidence in the fundamentals The news organisation The capability and experience of the news organisation provide the credentials that support trust in the news that is produced Integrity is the value that underpins this Nevertheless, there is still a need for a critical gaze Plurality of sources allows triangulation More important for stories where there can be vested interests --- Accuracy: Factual and correct – the basic building blocks of a story Based on thorough research and checking Impartiality: Balance, fairness, rounded view Editorial responsibility – avoiding skews of sensationalism and vested interests Appropriate lens for the story – e.g. global perspective for migration story vs domestic economic/political angle But also gravitate towards consistency with my world view Tonality: Images/video help bring the story to life – become a witness as if unmediated, and observe reactions Written text can be absorbing and immersive – authority of the written word, power of language The format of the story can lend impact and increase engagement, and tends to align with platform Capability: A credible provider of news Having expertise, reach, scope, skilled journalists Though, generally, the news brand and platform are more salient – journalists often write to house style set by editor Some exceptions are experts, e.g. arts review Experience: A consistent track record, reputation and heritage Familiarity of a brand, like a friend, know what to expect Integrity: This is about the news organisation’s values – how they operate, the qualities that underpin their behaviour Allows belief and trust Plurality: Despite all the other factors, need to be vigilant and take a critical view – triangulate But this requires some effort, which is not always deemed necessary – depends on the type of news, interest and need More important for stories (e.g. politics) where there can be vested interests
- What generates mistrust? Sensationalising headlines, emotive images, tone of voice – cues that seem manipulating Suppression, censorship and cover up – not getting the full story Dissonance in stance/political perspective Distortion of commercial interests e.g. defence companies ‘Click bait’ – questionable motivation of source, lack of integrity Errors and inaccuracies
- DISTRIBUTED ENVIRONMENTS – trust in news via aggregators and social media Aggregators provide convenience, allowing tailoring of news provided, and providing plurality of sources as well as range of stories Although they’re not familiar to everyone, esp among older and less tech engaged Some struggle with the concept and not given any thought to algorithms, and not all aggregator brands are known Judged through trial – not all equally good On reflection, some question how the aggregator makes the content selection (ES: Google News has been shut down due to issues of remuneration of news brands’ content) Established news brands provide trust – aggregators capitalise on this, with news brands’ credibility enhancing the aggregator’s credentials and credibility
- We also see interesting generational differences in how people are using social media…. So older groups here using it in a more passive way … Here somebody from Germany still primarily getting news from TV news … and using social media as a secondary source or alerting people to the death David bowie, but interesting that this person wouldn’t then click into the article because they don’t feel it has integrity. Younger groups on the other hand are much more active, using the full range of options . Somebody here taking about getting first hand blogs and videos from friends in the refugee camps in Calais and someone else talking about the community and the chat as a key part of the experience – the combination of the newspaper and the chat room Taking the newspaper and the chat room culture and smashing them together
- Trusting in news via social media is more complex News can arrive in different ways From followed news brands – chosen and expected But also from friends, who might/might not be trusted – more serendipitous Credit vested in the news brand, at least initially News brands provide credibility and trust, esp for those actively using the platform for news News brands also useful signals of accuracy amidst risk of misinformation and propaganda However, first-hand accounts and citizen journalism competing/complementing news brands Content from news brands also passively, incidentally received – over time the platform can become a credible and trusted destination, with less recognition going to the brands News brand not always very prominent in social media platform In Facebook, the news brand is recessive and tends to be secondary to the headline and image But has a mental presence if followed, and appears in feed Brand more prominent in other platforms, e.g. Twitter
- Social media – different views of whether the brand or the friend or the headline are important…
- Generally, younger and tech engaged more open to algorithm Algorithm advantages: Democratic, free of the agenda of an editor/ publisher Provides tailored news selection Possible to get much broader selection across range of brands But: Can produce odd results Risk of filter bubble – limit exposure to sources, miss out on important news Some uncomfortable about black box feel, risk of someone’s agenda being pushed Data concerns (esp DE), targeted ads Editor advantages: Human expertise, making informed decisions about the news that is important Provides a quality control Provides more manageable selection Feels more accountable Intrinsic to newspapers – news heartland But: Agenda of editor or higher powers – political bias, other forms of bias Risk of some news being filtered out
- Editor vs algorithms…
- FUTURE SPECULATION Foresee continued shift towards digital, at the expense of traditional platforms Still role for TV and, to a lesser extent, radio – but bleak outlook for print Regret over print’s demise: nostalgia, weekend experience, digital detox Print may have future in more niche, specialist offer Yet they’re keen to see traditional, trusted brands survive Widespread awareness of economic pressures, but not of the revenue threat from social media & aggregators (except in ES – Google News) Minority don’t care – not ‘not my problem’ Brands will continue to be important, but established providers need to evolve to survive, follow models of digital-born brands – ought to be greater revenue sharing/ payment for content from aggregators & social media Some value greater independence of potential rise of digital-born news brands; but don’t yet have track record (experience & capability) of well-established, trusted brands
- 1. Platforms fit into different routines and help people engage with news stories in different ways Smart devices provide easy access and encourage frequent checking of news Social media works well for breaking news and for many people provides a supplement However, social media is gradually eroding some traditional platforms, especially printed newspapers 2. Brands are an important vehicle for trust Individual brands have different strengths and roles – across types of news, stages of news story evolution, times of the day, and across different platforms For the most part, journalists are not prominent and are subsumed within the news brand Native digital brands are not as well known, but can fit within a repertoire alongside more established news brands Plurality is valued and allows triangulation – some stories are followed up across sources for corroboration as well as elaboration 3. Brands have varied visibility in distributed environments News brands are important in aggregators, lending credibility to both the news and the aggregator Where news is actively followed in social media, news brands are likewise important, although their visual prominence varies across different social media brands Social media works well for breaking news, which can be provisional and raw – the trust and authority of news brands is of less importance at this initial stage, although they play a role if the story is actively pursued News can also be received by serendipity in social media – in platforms where cues to the news brand are not prominent the social media brand itself can develop trust over time, with little credit going to the traditional news brands 4. The importance of the sharer of a news story in social media varies The sharer’s role can be somewhat functional – generally, the topic/headline are the priority However, where there is a connection between the sharer and the news, some credit goes to the sharer in that exchange 5. Views about editors versus algorithms are mixed, and some are unaware of the latter Typically, those who are more tech savvy have a preference for algorithms, which they consider to be more independent and to allow a greater variety of news topics as well as plurality of sources Others, though, (typically older) appreciate the traditional role of an editor in determining what is important, and take comfort amidst the overwhelming quantity of content in the digital environment There are also some (especially in DE) who have concerns about the use of their data 6. People are keen for established, trusted news brands to continue well into the future They are largely unaware of the potential threat posed by social media and aggregators in the current business model They hope traditional players will be able to adapt to the evolving environment