My discussion has been primarily about TV Networks and the impact Internet has had as a whole. One of the biggest components of major TV Networks is their news coverage. The Internet has had a drastic impact on the way news is transferred and reported. I was curious to delve deeper into this subject and get a first-hand perspective on how the Internet has impacted the TV Networks that broadcast TV and print journalism. In this post, I've been lucky enough to receive the opportunity to interview Julia Yarbough, a 22-year industry veteran. Julia is an Emmy-award winning print and TV journalist. She has been an in-studio anchor for NBC6-WTVJ Miami, KCBS2 in Los Angeles, WSVN South Florida, WLKY Louisville, KY, WEAR Pensacola, FL, and KEYT in Santa Barbara, CA. She has covered the Winter Olympics from Torino, Italy and the Summer Olympics in Beijing, China. Julia has received the prestigious N.A.T.A.S. Emmy, The Sunshine State Award from the Society of Professional Journalists, and is the recipient of a 2009 Fellowship with The Institutes of Journalism & Natural Resources.
During my interview with Julia, I wanted to get her perspective on everything from the evolution of journalism, social media, and the ratings impact on TV Networks to the role of the journalist in the present day and how TV Networks are adapting to the change.
The Internet has had a huge impact on journalism and media. The way
journalists receive and report on information has evolved. Can you talk a
little bit about how the Internet changed the way you did your job as a
journalist from when you first entered the industry until your exit?
The evolution of technology and the use of the internet has
drastically changed how the news industry gathers and covers news and events,
what the public expects and also what reporters, producers and news teams are
expected to generate. When I first began in the industry, the newsroom I worked
for was a small operation in Pensacola, Florida; we were not on computers yet,
but still created our scripts using typewriters. All news wire was printed from
a 24/7 AP machine that spit out news updates. All information was gathered with
phone calls or going directly to the location you needed the information from
(interviews, research, etc). By the time
the internet had taken hold, as a reporter, we quickly realized we could gather
information on numerous topics at once, quickly and efficiently. It allowed us
to have a greater reach across regions, for info, photos, video and live
interviews. It used to be that interviews could only be accomplished through
satellite hook-ups; now anyone can fire up their computer and go live via
internet connections, from most any location on the globe. This of course means
as journalists, we have access to images, events, opinions and situations the
globe over at a moment’s notice. The upside is we can gather incredible amounts
of information; the down side – people’s attention span is now shorter than
ever, the demands on journalists are greater, as stories change by the hour –
sometimes by the minute and viewers are conditioned to expect instant results. Journalists entering the field today now MUST be able to adapt to all social media tools, dual
platforms for creating stories (tv, web, youtube, etc) and be able to produce
factual, fair and honest segments, but with double and triple the information
and less than half the time to do so. The other downside – most anyone believes
that he or she can point a camera, upload information, and call themselves a journalist –
NOT TRUE – there is still a craft involved in knowing how to identify a story,
create an informational segment and produce quality work.
A lot of people get their breaking news from Twitter and other forms of
social media. In fact, a lot of people try to be the first to break news to the
world through social media avenues, and of course, this opens up the potential
for false information to be spread around very quickly. It seems like it has
become a race to see who can click "Submit" first as opposed to which
network can print or air faster. How has this changed the role of the TV
Network and journalist?
As stated above – that is a huge drawback to the increased
technology. The key for most professional journalists is to still work quickly,
but hold true to the values of journalism of capturing a fair, honest, and
balanced segment. Unfortunately, many in the younger generation are only
familiar with news nuggets found on Twitter and the like, and do not understand
the dangers associated with the possibilities of false information being spread
quickly. Again, that is where (hopefully) trained journalists still have the
upper hand; of knowing when to make one more call to verify a fact before
hitting the "Send Button", and having cultivated solid resources to call on.
Have ratings for TV Networks declined because of the ease of
information access? Has this impacted the networks' revenue and ability to sell
ad space?
I can’t speak to that with solid facts – however, there has
of course been an onslaught of cable channels, internet channels, immediate
access to information, so yes, this has affected the market share of traditional
news sources. Larger organizations realize that to stay in the game they have
to change with the times and stay ahead of the curve – most now offer customers
news around the clock, so they can still find a loyal source – the information
is simply delivered in a different fashion. It has, however affected the
numbers of journalists working in the field, as more traditional brick and
mortar operations have cut back in lieu of more online, and remote computer
access work, or automated systems
Has the quality of journalism been affected by the way information is
being transferred now?
Personal opinion; YES. I believe there is such a focus on
getting it first, or showing the most action-packed video possible, that many
outlets are focusing more on that, rather than solid stories which impact their
communities. But again, a journalist with a solid understanding of the role of
a journalist – the gatekeeper to information; the messenger; the one
who MUST provide accurate, fair, balanced, and integrity filled information –
still produces work that holds value.
Did the emergence of the Internet make any part of your job harder? Has
it made it harder for the TV Networks?
I don’t think it made my job harder; simply MORE TO DO.
Instead of finishing one segment, the reporters must now also create segment
suitable for the internet. Now journalists need to write a blog post, keep up with their social media before,
during, and after their stories. There is constant demand; which I did not have
during my early years.
Do you think that the TV Networks have done a good job adapting to the
Internet change?
I think many of the major networks were a bit slow to switch
over, but I believe now they are back in front of emerging technologies which
will keep them in the game as leaders. Look at CNN and NBC News; as well as the
other major networks – all have strong platforms online, all embrace and
encourage social media and viewer input, as well as taking submissions from the
public. It's another way for them to keep their fingers on the pulse, while providing
quality content.
Where do you see the future of journalism and TV Networks going as the
Internet and technology continues to evolve?
I wish I had the answer; but I think technology changes so
rapidly, that the direction the industry will go may be directly related to the next
big tech breakthrough. Consider the massive changes that have occurred due to
Facebook and Twitter. While covering the Beijing Olympics in 2008, I did not have access to the social media tools available now. I
could have reached followers and fans and viewers the globe over from my cell
phone. Now, that option is standard for many reporters. It’s an exciting
industry to be in, simply because it MUST always adapt, change, and grow
quickly, unlike many other fields which remain stuck in old habits and
patterns.
Thanks a lot, Julia. It was much appreciated.
Julia's responses were fascinating. A few things stood out for me. In my first question when Julia responded, "the down side – people’s attention span is now shorter than ever, the demands on journalists are greater, as stories change by the hour – sometimes by the minute and viewers are conditioned to expect instant results. " highlights a spillover effect caused by the demand for instantaneous information at our fingertips. Journalists being forced into high gear is nothing new to the industry, but where this becomes particularly tumultuous is for the TV Network. As the Network scrambles to stay in tangent with up-to-the-second news, they are competing with pseudo-journalists. Viewership and site hits mean ratings and advertising dollars for TV Networks. Their goal is to capitalize on their consumer base. Their challenge now seems to not just be to break the story, but continuously provide updates and keep the story fresh as often as possible to keep the interest of their consumer base high.
Julia talked a little bit about the role of the journalist and how many people now believe that they can carry and point a camera, click upload, and call themselves journalists. It's a bit alarming that the sources of information can be varied widely, and the Networks have to compete to still be the first to break the story while still being held accountable for the facts and sources of the story before getting in front of the camera and hitting the "Send Button". As mentioned above, the accuracy of a story is critical for journalists and bad information can spread like wildfire. Sources of information in the Digital Age have made this even more of a rampant problem, and a journalist reporting on a story could severely damage the reputation of the Network if sources aren't checked. A misinformed report could spell disaster for the Network and have a wide range of ripple effects that extend to advertisers, and ultimately, the bottom line for the Network.
The direct and tangible impact that Julia spoke about to the Networks was in her discussion of market share being affected by the way news is transferred now. She spoke about the demand for news still remaining constant because consumers still want a loyal source for their news, however, the medium of transfer is different. Now, less journalists are out in the field and more behind computer screens. Demand has shifted in the News Industry just as it has in the Cable Industry. The market is now preferring online digital content in a variety of different types of media (shows, movies, news, etc.). As we continue to see the shifts in demand, Julia mentioned that the major Networks are having to "stay ahead of the curve" as well, and in the Entertainment space, we've already seen Disney make moves to meet the same changing consumer demands.
As in other industries, a change in the way people consume news does not mean the end for journalists. Julia spoke about the constant demands on journalists today to keep blogs, Twitter, and other social media relevant and fresh. She also spoke about the need for a new skill set in the market, social media savvy. Networks will have to recognize this type of skill as a necessary asset in an anchor or journalist, and not just an added benefit. As Networks continue to change to meet the market demands, the pressure to grow and retain a loyal viewership increases, and so do their costs. They are now competing for online advertising space dollars and not traditional airtime. As Julia stated, Networks are trying to interact with their viewers to gain their loyalty and prevent a switch. In order for revenue to be sustained, viewers need to find value in the content and feel like they are wanted. Julia cited NBC News and CNN as the two giants who have been successful in embracing public demand and maintaining market share in the presence of online growth.
It's shocking to hear Julia's experience of being at the Beijing Olympics, only a little more than 4 years ago, and not have access to thousands of viewers for her work. I agree with her that the next big technology shift in the internet space will be the dictator for where the News Networks go. Through the changes, one thing is clear, the Networks that practice journalism have been well-equipped and adaptable to the changes. Until sources and stories can gain credibility outside of Network validation of the facts, the demand for news at a major network will stay constant. I don't think they will be going anywhere soon.
Shawn
A couple glaring things about these statistics stands out to me. The first is that cord cutting is not a hot trend that the market is going to be taking by storm. It actually seems more like people are finding alternative ways to use technology. AT&T and Verizon have this enormous fiber backbone across the nation that they've been able to utilize. Consumers seem to have become more savvy to the idea of no delay channel changing, room-to-room watching, and other services that make these subscription TV services very desirable. The value that comes with these services is tremendous, and consumers seem to be reacting very favorably to this. A streaming service like Aereo or Hulu or Netflix is still seen by the vast majority of the market as a supplement to their regular service. It is more an ability to watch a wide variety of different content channels while knowing that the stream won't lag or pause unexpectedly. They're able to have more control over their viewing experience. Streaming is nice in concept, but at this point, that market is trying to validate their proof of concept right now.
The next thing that jumps out at me is the bundling of these products and services. With Fios and U-Verse, you're able to get high speed internet and TV over a reliable fiber backbone. I attended a talk in 2010 with AT&T's COO, John Stankey and he spoke about the necessity to make AT&T products and services "sticky". Essentially, he was talking about making the switching costs for customers too high. AT&T and Verizon are unique players in the pay-TV industry because they both have immense amounts of capital as well as the infrastructure to maintain their growth. Customers can bundle their wireless and wireline services together into one provider. Tiered spending discounts and promotions are given to customers who have all of these services combined together. One of the drawbacks to this is that AT&T and Verizon are relatively new players in this market and in order to build their business, they need to build out their fiber optic backbone. Currently, AT&T and Verizon are segmented into which territories they control and can bring their service to. It is very much a predetermined split share of market. Without the infrastructure, customers can't enjoy these services. Satellite TV services like DirecTV and Dish Network can bring their service to any household because their services are portable.
