Infotainment is "information-based media content or
programming that also includes entertainment content in an effort to
enhance popularity with audiences and consumers."[1]
The term can also refer to the hardware/software products and systems
which are built into, or can be added to vehicles in order to enhance
driver and/or passenger experience. It is a neologistic
portmanteau of information and entertainment,
referring to a type of
media which provides a combination of information and entertainment.
According to many dictionaries[2]
infotainment is always television, and the term is "mainly
disapproving."[3]
However, many self-described infotainment websites exist, which provide
a variety of functions and services.,[4]
many of which include the several increasingly popular social media
websites and applications being used daily by billions of users world
wide.
Criticism
The label "infotainment" is emblematic of concern and criticism that
journalism is devolving from a medium which conveys serious information
about issues affecting public interest, into a form of entertainment
which happens to have fresh "facts" in the mix. The criteria by which
reporters and editors judge news value - whether something is worth
putting on the front page, the bottom of the hour, or is worth
commenting on at all - are integral parts of this debate. Some blame the
media for this perceived phenomenon, for failing to live up to ideals of
civic journalistic responsibility, while others blame the commercial
nature of many media organizations, the need for higher ratings,
combined with a preference among the public for feel-good content and
"unimportant" topics like celebrity gossip or sports.[citation
needed] In a critique of infotainment, Bonnie
Anderson of News Flash cited a
CNN lead story on February 2, 2004 following the
exposure of Janet Jackson's breast on national television. The
follow-up story was about a
ricin
chemical attack on then-U.S.
Senate
Majority Leader
Bill Frist.[5]
A specialization process has also occurred, beginning with the rise
of mass market special-interest magazines, moving into broadcast with
the advent of cable television, and continuing into new media, like the
Internet and satellite radio.[citation
needed] An increasing number of media outlets are
available to the public which exclusively focus on a single topic such
as current events, home improvement, history, movies, women and
Christianity. Consumers have a broad choice whether they receive a
general feed of the most "important" information of the day or a highly
customized presentation of a single type of content. Highly customized
content streams may not be considered newsworthy nor contain a neutral
point of view. Some publications and channels have found a sizable
audience in the "niche" of featuring hard news.[citation
needed]
Controversy has continued over the size of the audience and whether
outlets are diluting content with too much "soft" news. The distinction
between journalists and anchors versus reporters are "human
interest", personality, or celebrity news story pieces.[citation
needed] Soft news reporters and stories are
typically directed by marketing share departments based on a demographic
appeal and audience share. It is commonly accepted news anchors are also
media personalities which may also be considered celebrities. Media
outlets commonly use on-air personalities for their public appeal to
promote the network's investments similar to the regular broadcast
schedule including self-promotion and advertising. Critics might go so
far as to view anchors as a weak link, representing the misplacement of
both the credit and the accountability of a news journalism
organization—hence adding to a perceived erosion of journalistic
standards throughout the news business.[citation
needed] (See
yellow journalism.)
Most infotainment television programs on
networks and broadcast cable only contain general information on the
subjects they cover and should not be considered to be formal learning
or instruction. An example of a broadcast may include
accusations of a celebrity or other individual committing a crime
with no verifiable factual support or evidence of such claims. It can be
said that many viewers and social critics disapprove of how media,
particularly TV and cable, seem to hurtle from one event to another,
often dwelling on trivial, celebrity-driven content
[6]
As seen with the commodification celebrities and public figures/leaders,
news media is more frequently commodifying and selling the stories of
people’s lives for pure viewer reaction and entertainment, as opposed to
more focus being placed on real stories with informative meaning behind
them.
Recently in October 2012 at the rally to restore sanity and/or fear,
a man named Jon Stewart made a very strong metaphorical statement
regarding the media today: “The press can hold its magnifying glass up
to our problems . . . illuminating issues heretofore unseen, or they can
use that magnifying glass to light ants on fire and then perhaps host a
week of shows on the sudden, unexpected, dangerous flaming ant epidemic.”
This statement referred to the news media’s ability to focus in on the
real problems of people, and transform them into what is known as
infotainment, when this information is solely provided for the public’s
entertainment. Today’s broadcasting of informative news is often diluted
with stories of scandal, although this is no concern for media and news
broadcasters because if you can keep enough viewers week after week
focused on whatever is that next “flaming ant epidemic” (e.g., a
congressman’s sexual indiscretions, conspiracy theories about the
president’s birth certificate), you can boost audience ratings and sell
ads at higher rates[7]
Infotainment versus journalism
Some define "journalism" only as reporting on "serious" subjects,
where common
journalistic standards are upheld by the reporter. Others believe
that the larger "news business" encompasses everything from professional
journalism to so-called "soft news" and "infotainment", and support
activities such as marketing, advertising sales, finance and delivery.
Nevertheless, a differentiation of the two concepts of "hard news" and
"soft news" is controversial.[8]
Professional journalism is supposed to place more emphasis on
research, fact-checking, and the
public interest than its "non-journalistic" counterparts. Because
the term "news"
is quite broad, the terms "hard" and "soft" denote both a difference in
respective standards for
news value, as well as for standards of conduct, relative to the
professional ideals of
journalistic integrity.
The idea of hard news embodies two
orthogonal concepts:
- Seriousness: Politics, economics, crime, war, and
disasters are considered serious topics, as are certain aspects of
law, business, science, and technology.
- Timeliness: Stories that cover current events—the
progress of a war, the results of a vote, the breaking out of a
fire, a significant statement, the freeing of a prisoner, an
economic report of note.
The logical opposite, soft news is sometimes referred to in a
derogatory fashion as infotainment. Defining features catching
the most criticism include:
- The least serious subjects: Arts and entertainment,
sports, lifestyles, "human interest", and celebrities.
- Not timely: There is no precipitating event triggering
the story, other than a reporter's curiosity.
Timely events happen in less serious subjects—sporting matches,
celebrity misadventures, movie releases, art exhibits, and so on.
There may also be serious reports which are not event-driven—coverage
of important social, economic, legal, or technological trends;
investigative reports which uncover ongoing corruption, waste, or
immorality; or discussion of unsettled political issues without any
special reason. Anniversaries, holidays, the end of a year or season, or
the end of the first 100 days of an administration, can make some
stories time-sensitive, but provide more of an opportunity for
reflection and analysis than any actual "news" to report.
The spectrum of "seriousness" and "importance" is not well-defined,
and different media organizations make different tradeoffs. "News you
can use", a common marketing phrase highlighting a specific genre of
journalism, spans the gray area. Gardening tips and hobby "news" pretty
clearly fall at the entertainment end. Warnings about imminent natural
disasters or acute domestic security threats (such as air raids or
terrorist attacks) are considered so important that broadcast media
(even non-news channels) usually interrupt other programming to announce
them. A medical story about a new treatment for breast cancer, or a
report about local ground water pollution might fall in between. So
might book reviews, or coverage of religion. On the other hand, people
frequently find hobbies and entertainment to be worthwhile parts of
their lives and so "importance" on a personal level is rather
subjective.
Entertainment and news crossovers
Infotainers are entertainers in infotainment media, such as
news anchors or "news personalities" who cross the line between
journalism (quasi-journalism) and entertainment. Notable examples in the
U.S. media are
Barbara Walters,
Katie Couric,
Keith Olbermann,
Glenn Beck,
Anderson Cooper,
Maury Povich,
Deborah Norville, and
Geraldo Rivera among others.
Barbara Walters, though not the first to cross the line between news
and personality stories, is for many the quintessential news-media
icon. Her
career dates back to the 50s, and her current prominence at ABC is
largely due to celebrity interviews, with a long running co-anchorship
on
20/20 with
Hugh Downs and, later,
John Stossel until 2004, and her overlapping morning infotainment
show
The View.
When
Geraldo Rivera became the host of his own news-oriented talk show on
CNBC,
others within the NBC organization voiced their protest, including
Tom
Brokaw who was reported to have threatened to quit. Rivera had a
notorious history as a "sleaze reporter" and daytime
talk
show host, where he and one or two others were representative of "Tabloid
talk shows"; television seen to have little social value or
redeeming intelligence, but still popular with viewers.
Commodification within Infotainment
The broadcast of important or interesting events was originally meant
simply to inform society of local or international events for their own
safety and awareness. However, local news broadcasters are more
regularly commodifying local events to provoke titillation and
entertainment in viewers. Commodification is known as the process by
which material objects are turned into marketable goods with monetary
(exchange) value.[9]
Essential qualities of human beings and their products are converted
into commodities, into things for buying and selling on the market,[10]
just as entertaining stories are sold to buy the attention of viewers.
Commodity fetishism is the process through which commodities are
emptied of the meaning of their production (the labour that produced
them and the context in which they were produced) and filled instead
with the abstract meaning (usually through advertising)[11]
At their worst, the media’s appetite for telling and selling stories
leads them not only to document tragedy, but also to misrepresent or
exploit it[12]
As often seen in the news (with stories of extreme obesity or unusual
deformities) present-day "infotainment" commodifies humans through their
personal tragedies or scandals, providing entertainment and titillation
to public viewers.
Infotainment and social media implications
The topic of news media today being more commonly considered
“infotainment” has increased with the growing popularity and use of
social media applications. These popular social media outlets are what
German theorist Jurgen Habermas’ would define as the “public sphere.”
According to Habermas, it defines a social space (which may be virtual)
in which citizens come together to debate and discuss the pressing
issues of their society. The term has been used more recently in the
plural to refer to the multiple public spheres in which people debate
contemporary issues.[13]
In the case of social media websites such as Twitter and Facebook, which
were originally created for the purpose of connecting, re-connecting and
sharing personal thoughts and information with public, they have now
provided a new medium for the spread of "infotainment" and exploitation
of public matters. There is no doubt that these social media websites
are dominating, and what is so pressing about the matter is the fact
that alongside cell phone technology, these ways of online communication
are becoming prominent to the simple relaying of informative news. Of
necessity, a commodity-based society produces such phantom objectivity,
and in so doing it obscures its roots.[14]
The public society are relying more frequently on television news
broadcasting and now social media outlets to obtain a mixture of
information and entertainment updates which are known as "infotainment."
Apocrypha
The terms "infotainment" and "infotainer" were first used in
September 1980 at the Joint Conference of Aslib, the Institute
of Information Scientists and the Library Association in
Sheffield, UK. The Infotainers were a group of British information
scientists who put on comedy shows at their professional conferences
between 1980 and 1990.
An earlier, and slightly variant term, "infortainment" was coined in
1974 as the title of the 1974 convention of the Intercollegiate
Broadcasting System (IBS), the association of college radio stations in
the United States. It took place on April 5–7, 1974, at the Statler
Hilton Hotel, now the Hotel Pennsylvania. It was defined as the "nexus
between Information and Entertainment".
See also