Good Reporting Is Worth It, Study Lies
Something called the Project for Excellence in Journalism has just completed a decade-long study on local television in America. You may be shocked to hear that this study, conducted by the Project for Excellence in Journalism, found that people wanted more excellence in their journalism! According to their report, "the more local TV invests in quality reporting, the bigger its audience tends to be." Oh, "quality reporting" apparently does not mean "crime news and celebrity news," though where on the spectrum skateboarding dogs or tanning bed-related health scares is not specified. Hey, wouldn't you know, their methodology is flawed. As CJR notes, the study's claim that "hard news with high journalistic standards attracts viewers" doesn't take into account the cost of quality journalism, which may outweigh the benefit in audience size. Also, there is the correlation versus causation conundrum that (ironically!!!) bedevils pretty much all local tv "reporting" on "health" and "science." Like, maybe networks with large audiences and therefore high revenue can afford to do more and better reporting! And if their ratings drop they cut the budget and then can not longer afford real reporting. But the Project for Excellence in Journalism wishes very much that there was actually a market for Excellence in Journalism. Maybe there is! People always say they want better news. People also say they hate negative campaign ads. People also say they're totally going to eat better and work out.