Knowledge

Soft media

Source đź“ť

36: 231:, researchers found politically uninvolved people who viewed candidates on daytime talk shows were likely to find those candidates more likable than their opponents. Studies show that instead of using a candidate's political policy to determine whether or not the candidate represents their interests, non-politically involved people also use a candidate's likability. 135:
defines as the "coverage of breaking events involving top leaders, major issues, or significant disruptions in the routines of daily life". While the purposes of both hard and soft news include informing the public, the two differ from one another in both the information contained within them and the
234:
A study conducted in Australia concluded hard news is more followed than soft news, except in the realm of sports. The study found that regardless of age and sex, soft news is less likely to be followed than hard news. With the lack in following for soft news, support for increased public engagement
242:
was established, which indicated that the intake of soft news has a positive effect on patterns of voting consistency in people who are otherwise politically unaware. In addition to this, Baum and Jamison's study found that watching interviews of candidates on soft media helps improve voting
211:
television in a variety of programs especially in a time of national crises. Studies have shown that news presented in this context attracts the attention of otherwise politically uninvolved people. Overall more people tend to watch hard news than soft news shows. However, those who are less
206:
more than five hours of television per day. During this time, they are exposed to a variety of news and information that either directly (hard news) or indirectly (soft news) focuses on politics, foreign affairs, and policy. These topics are aired on
136:
methods that are used to present that information. Communicated through forms of soft media, soft news is usually contained in outlets that primarily serve as sources of entertainment, such as television programs, magazines, or print articles.
152:
is not in flux, the form is. For many Americans the lines are becoming blurred between hard and soft media as news organizations are blending their broadcasts with news shows and entertainment. Many of these
1129: 1139: 1134: 131:
Soft news is defined as information that is primarily entertaining or personally useful. Soft news is often contrasted with hard news, which Harvard political scientist
329:"Doing Well and Doing Good: How Soft News and Critical Journalism Are Shrinking the News Audience and Weakening Democracy–And What News Outlets Can Do About It" 148:. These are, in large part, the byproducts of soft media. A fundamental role of the media, either hard or soft, is to inform the public. While the role of 447: 186:) became a source of political information. This illustrates that media organizations across the spectrum are emerging as suppliers of information on 628: 46: 1172: 339: 413:
From Hard to Soft News Standards? How Political Journalists in Different Media Systems Evaluate the Shifting Quality of News, Fritz Plasser
1119: 478: 565:
Baum, Matthew A.; Jamison, Angela S. (November 2006). "The Oprah Effect: How Soft News Helps Inattentive Citizens Vote Consistently".
228: 165: 433: 1097: 1214: 621: 1189: 227:
to those people who are generally not politically involved than a candidate's political policies do. For example, in the
1194: 898: 503: 80: 893: 710: 614: 454: 238:
In another study examining the effects of soft news consumption on voting behaviors, the phenomenon known as the
1224: 1124: 935: 774: 212:
politically involved can gain more from watching soft news than those who are highly politically involved.
1075: 735: 715: 257: 1070: 362:
Soft News Goes to War: Public Opinion and American Foreign Policy in the New Media Age, Matthew A. Baum
1184: 17: 579: 1256: 1234: 1114: 1037: 62: 328: 289:
Zaller, John (2003). "A New Standard of News Quality: Burglar Alarms for the Monitorial Citizen".
279:
Sex, Lies, and War: How Soft News Brings Foreign Policy to the Inattentive Public, Matthew A. Baum
1209: 662: 116:, magazines or print articles. The communication from soft media sources has been referred to as 157:
create a narrative that begins with the first broadcast in the morning and end with the evening
1199: 1062: 990: 955: 672: 574: 335: 1162: 1042: 930: 920: 903: 859: 757: 677: 637: 182: 149: 109: 97: 373: 1179: 1082: 985: 925: 834: 829: 725: 667: 652: 144:
There are many terms that can be associated with soft media, among them are soft news and
8: 1277: 1092: 1022: 324: 220: 176: 132: 1167: 910: 888: 883: 801: 796: 752: 592: 544: 396: 306: 154: 113: 1087: 1047: 1000: 824: 806: 694: 588: 548: 536: 519:
Nguyen, An (2012-10-01). "The Effect of Soft News on Public Attachment to the News".
499: 472: 224: 596: 310: 54: 1109: 1005: 995: 767: 684: 584: 528: 400: 388: 298: 239: 170: 1027: 854: 532: 493: 58: 374:"Hard and soft news: A review of concepts, operationalizations and key findings" 1057: 972: 962: 950: 866: 839: 784: 730: 252: 203: 302: 1271: 1157: 1104: 1032: 878: 689: 540: 392: 158: 105: 101: 422:
Reaching Women: Soft Media in the 2004 Presidential Election, Diane J. Heith
1251: 1239: 940: 720: 168:, magazines that would otherwise be considered lifestyle or entertainment ( 145: 606: 1015: 945: 779: 657: 1229: 1219: 977: 762: 747: 641: 208: 121: 915: 849: 816: 1244: 871: 789: 216: 191: 1204: 1010: 844: 187: 434:"Average American watches 5 hours of TV per day, report shows" 371: 215:
Studies have also shown that exposure to soft news can affect
372:
Reinemann, C.; Stanyer, J.; Scherr, S.; Legnante, G. (2012).
495:
The Oxford Handbook of American Public Opinion and the Media
243:
consistency in otherwise politically uninformed people.
336:
Harvard University John F. Kennedy School of Government
492:
Shapiro, Robert Y.; Jacobs, Lawrence R. (2013-05-23).
219:' attitudes. Soft media has been shown to increase a 1269: 27:Organizations focused on producing infotainment 622: 491: 43:The examples and perspective in this article 275: 273: 1120:Political polarization in the United States 636: 564: 120:as a way of distinguishing it from serious 629: 615: 1173:Facebook–Cambridge Analytica data scandal 578: 323: 270: 81:Learn how and when to remove this message 431: 100:organizations that primarily deal with 14: 1270: 518: 477:: CS1 maint: archived copy as title ( 288: 1215:Psychological effects of Internet use 610: 560: 558: 29: 1190:Digital media use and mental health 223:’s likability, which has a greater 112:. Soft media can take the form of 24: 555: 25: 1289: 1195:Effects of violence in mass media 899:Smartphones and pedestrian safety 432:Hinckley, David (March 5, 2014). 235:caused by soft news is rejected. 1168:2021 Facebook company files leak 894:Mobile phones and driving safety 589:10.1111/j.1468-2508.2006.00482.x 436:– via New York Daily News. 34: 1140:2020 U.S. presidential election 1135:2016 U.S. presidential election 512: 485: 345:from the original on 2021-12-09 440: 425: 416: 407: 365: 356: 317: 282: 13: 1: 711:Betteridge's law of headlines 263: 139: 1225:Social aspects of television 1125:Social media use in politics 775:Missing white woman syndrome 533:10.1080/1461670X.2012.664318 7: 736:Least objectionable program 258:Least objectionable program 246: 57:, discuss the issue on the 10: 1294: 1071:Algorithmic radicalization 229:2000 presidential election 197: 166:2004 presidential campaign 1185:Cultural impact of TikTok 1150: 1056: 971: 815: 703: 648: 303:10.1080/10584600390211136 1257:Violence and video games 1235:Social impact of YouTube 1115:Knowledge gap hypothesis 1038:Social-desirability bias 936:Information–action ratio 393:10.1177/1464884911427803 1210:Mass shooting contagion 663:Evolutionary psychology 567:The Journal of Politics 291:Political Communication 1200:Fascination with death 1063:Political polarization 991:Availability heuristic 956:Television consumption 1163:Criticism of Facebook 1043:Social influence bias 931:Information pollution 921:Information explosion 904:Texting while driving 860:Low information voter 758:Pink-slime journalism 202:The average American 183:O: The Oprah Magazine 1180:Criticism of Netflix 986:Availability cascade 926:Information overload 835:Attention management 830:Attention inequality 726:Human-interest story 668:Behavioral modernity 653:Cognitive psychology 325:Patterson, Thomas E. 63:create a new article 55:improve this article 45:may not represent a 1093:Post-truth politics 1023:Mean world syndrome 177:Ladies Home Journal 114:television programs 911:Influence-for-hire 889:Media multitasking 884:Human multitasking 802:Tabloid television 753:Media manipulation 521:Journalism Studies 155:news organizations 1265: 1264: 1088:Fake news website 1048:Spiral of silence 1001:Confirmation bias 825:Attention economy 807:Yellow journalism 695:Social psychology 91: 90: 83: 65:, as appropriate. 16:(Redirected from 1285: 1110:Knowledge divide 1006:Crowd psychology 996:Bandwagon effect 768:Public relations 685:Media psychology 631: 624: 617: 608: 607: 601: 600: 582: 562: 553: 552: 527:(5–6): 706–717. 516: 510: 509: 489: 483: 482: 476: 468: 466: 465: 459: 453:. Archived from 452: 444: 438: 437: 429: 423: 420: 414: 411: 405: 404: 378: 369: 363: 360: 354: 353: 351: 350: 344: 333: 321: 315: 314: 286: 280: 277: 164:During the U.S. 133:Thomas Patterson 86: 79: 75: 72: 66: 38: 37: 30: 21: 1293: 1292: 1288: 1287: 1286: 1284: 1283: 1282: 1268: 1267: 1266: 1261: 1146: 1061: 1052: 1028:Negativity bias 976: 967: 855:Cognitive miser 811: 704:Media practices 699: 644: 635: 605: 604: 580:10.1.1.580.1696 563: 556: 517: 513: 506: 490: 486: 470: 469: 463: 461: 457: 450: 448:"Archived copy" 446: 445: 441: 430: 426: 421: 417: 412: 408: 376: 370: 366: 361: 357: 348: 346: 342: 331: 322: 318: 287: 283: 278: 271: 266: 249: 200: 142: 87: 76: 70: 67: 52: 39: 35: 28: 23: 22: 15: 12: 11: 5: 1291: 1281: 1280: 1263: 1262: 1260: 1259: 1254: 1249: 1248: 1247: 1237: 1232: 1227: 1222: 1217: 1212: 1207: 1202: 1197: 1192: 1187: 1182: 1177: 1176: 1175: 1170: 1160: 1154: 1152: 1151:Related topics 1148: 1147: 1145: 1144: 1143: 1142: 1137: 1132: 1122: 1117: 1112: 1107: 1102: 1101: 1100: 1095: 1085: 1080: 1079: 1078: 1067: 1065: 1058:Digital divide 1054: 1053: 1051: 1050: 1045: 1040: 1035: 1030: 1025: 1020: 1019: 1018: 1013: 1003: 998: 993: 988: 982: 980: 973:Cognitive bias 969: 968: 966: 965: 963:Sticky content 960: 959: 958: 953: 951:Binge-watching 943: 938: 933: 928: 923: 918: 913: 908: 907: 906: 901: 896: 891: 881: 876: 875: 874: 867:Digital zombie 864: 863: 862: 852: 847: 842: 840:Attention span 837: 832: 827: 821: 819: 813: 812: 810: 809: 804: 799: 794: 793: 792: 785:Sensationalism 782: 777: 772: 771: 770: 765: 760: 750: 745: 744: 743: 738: 733: 731:Junk food news 728: 718: 713: 707: 705: 701: 700: 698: 697: 692: 687: 682: 681: 680: 675: 670: 660: 655: 649: 646: 645: 634: 633: 626: 619: 611: 603: 602: 573:(4): 946–959. 554: 511: 504: 498:. OUP Oxford. 484: 439: 424: 415: 406: 387:(2): 221–239. 364: 355: 316: 297:(2): 109–130. 281: 268: 267: 265: 262: 261: 260: 255: 253:Junk food news 248: 245: 199: 196: 141: 138: 89: 88: 49:of the subject 47:worldwide view 42: 40: 33: 26: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 1290: 1279: 1276: 1275: 1273: 1258: 1255: 1253: 1250: 1246: 1243: 1242: 1241: 1238: 1236: 1233: 1231: 1228: 1226: 1223: 1221: 1218: 1216: 1213: 1211: 1208: 1206: 1203: 1201: 1198: 1196: 1193: 1191: 1188: 1186: 1183: 1181: 1178: 1174: 1171: 1169: 1166: 1165: 1164: 1161: 1159: 1158:Computer rage 1156: 1155: 1153: 1149: 1141: 1138: 1136: 1133: 1131: 1130:United States 1128: 1127: 1126: 1123: 1121: 1118: 1116: 1113: 1111: 1108: 1106: 1105:Filter bubble 1103: 1099: 1098:United States 1096: 1094: 1091: 1090: 1089: 1086: 1084: 1081: 1077: 1074: 1073: 1072: 1069: 1068: 1066: 1064: 1059: 1055: 1049: 1046: 1044: 1041: 1039: 1036: 1034: 1033:Peer pressure 1031: 1029: 1026: 1024: 1021: 1017: 1014: 1012: 1009: 1008: 1007: 1004: 1002: 999: 997: 994: 992: 989: 987: 984: 983: 981: 979: 974: 970: 964: 961: 957: 954: 952: 949: 948: 947: 944: 942: 939: 937: 934: 932: 929: 927: 924: 922: 919: 917: 914: 912: 909: 905: 902: 900: 897: 895: 892: 890: 887: 886: 885: 882: 880: 879:Doomscrolling 877: 873: 870: 869: 868: 865: 861: 858: 857: 856: 853: 851: 848: 846: 843: 841: 838: 836: 833: 831: 828: 826: 823: 822: 820: 818: 814: 808: 805: 803: 800: 798: 795: 791: 788: 787: 786: 783: 781: 778: 776: 773: 769: 766: 764: 761: 759: 756: 755: 754: 751: 749: 746: 742: 739: 737: 734: 732: 729: 727: 724: 723: 722: 719: 717: 714: 712: 709: 708: 706: 702: 696: 693: 691: 690:Media studies 688: 686: 683: 679: 676: 674: 671: 669: 666: 665: 664: 661: 659: 656: 654: 651: 650: 647: 643: 642:human factors 639: 632: 627: 625: 620: 618: 613: 612: 609: 598: 594: 590: 586: 581: 576: 572: 568: 561: 559: 550: 546: 542: 538: 534: 530: 526: 522: 515: 507: 505:9780199673025 501: 497: 496: 488: 480: 474: 460:on 2015-10-22 456: 449: 443: 435: 428: 419: 410: 402: 398: 394: 390: 386: 382: 375: 368: 359: 341: 337: 330: 326: 320: 312: 308: 304: 300: 296: 292: 285: 276: 274: 269: 259: 256: 254: 251: 250: 244: 241: 236: 232: 230: 226: 222: 218: 213: 210: 205: 195: 193: 189: 185: 184: 179: 178: 173: 172: 167: 162: 160: 159:entertainment 156: 151: 147: 137: 134: 129: 127: 123: 119: 115: 111: 107: 106:entertainment 103: 99: 95: 85: 82: 74: 64: 60: 56: 50: 48: 41: 32: 31: 19: 1252:Technophobia 1240:Technophilia 1083:Echo chamber 941:Rage farming 740: 721:Infotainment 570: 566: 524: 520: 514: 494: 487: 462:. Retrieved 455:the original 442: 427: 418: 409: 384: 380: 367: 358: 347:. Retrieved 319: 294: 290: 284: 240:Oprah Effect 237: 233: 214: 201: 181: 175: 169: 163: 146:infotainment 143: 130: 125: 117: 93: 92: 77: 68: 44: 1016:Moral panic 946:Screen time 780:News values 716:Gatekeeping 658:Externality 108:, arts and 1278:Mass media 1230:Social bot 1220:Sealioning 978:Conformity 763:Propaganda 748:Media bias 741:Soft media 464:2015-10-21 381:Journalism 349:2023-05-30 264:References 209:prime-time 140:Background 122:journalism 102:commentary 96:comprises 94:Soft media 916:Infodemic 850:Clickbait 817:Attention 673:Cognition 575:CiteSeerX 549:143212810 541:1461-670X 221:candidate 217:consumers 126:hard news 124:, called 118:soft news 110:lifestyle 71:July 2011 59:talk page 18:Soft news 1272:Category 1245:Neophile 872:Phubbing 790:Hot take 678:Mismatch 597:32777635 473:cite web 340:Archived 327:(2000). 311:56440776 247:See also 204:consumes 192:politics 53:You may 1205:Griefer 1011:Mobbing 845:Chumbox 797:Spiking 401:5731016 198:Effects 161:venue. 595:  577:  547:  539:  502:  399:  309:  225:appeal 188:policy 1076:Youth 638:Media 593:S2CID 545:S2CID 458:(PDF) 451:(PDF) 397:S2CID 377:(PDF) 343:(PDF) 332:(PDF) 307:S2CID 171:Vogue 150:media 98:media 61:, or 640:and 537:ISSN 500:ISBN 479:link 190:and 180:and 585:doi 529:doi 389:doi 299:doi 1274:: 591:. 583:. 571:68 569:. 557:^ 543:. 535:. 525:13 523:. 475:}} 471:{{ 395:. 385:13 383:. 379:. 338:. 334:. 305:. 295:20 293:. 272:^ 194:. 174:, 128:. 104:, 1060:/ 975:/ 630:e 623:t 616:v 599:. 587:: 551:. 531:: 508:. 481:) 467:. 403:. 391:: 352:. 313:. 301:: 84:) 78:( 73:) 69:( 51:. 20:)

Index

Soft news
worldwide view
improve this article
talk page
create a new article
Learn how and when to remove this message
media
commentary
entertainment
lifestyle
television programs
journalism
Thomas Patterson
infotainment
media
news organizations
entertainment
2004 presidential campaign
Vogue
Ladies Home Journal
O: The Oprah Magazine
policy
politics
consumes
prime-time
consumers
candidate
appeal
2000 presidential election
Oprah Effect

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

↑