СодержаниеIntroduction 3
Chapter I. From history of American press 5
1.1. Disturbing trends in journalism 5
1.2. Print technology 14
1.3. Magazines for the 21st century 17
1.4. The new world information order 19
Chapter II. The most famous American newspapers 23
2.1. The New York Times 23
2.2. USA TODAY 32
2.3. The Washington Post 35
2.4. The Washington Times 39
Chapter III. The role of Press in the Mass Culture 45
3.1. Mass Society and the Mass Culture 45
3.2. Famous events through a prism of press 49
Chapter IV. Advertising in Press 65
4.1. Intermedia advertising competition 65
4.2. Worldwide advertising 69
Conclusion 72
Bibliography 78
The list of advertising texts in Press 81ВведениеAmerican journalism itself has undergone a fundamental transformation in recent years, partly as a result of new technology and partly as a result of the changes in the society it has chosen to mirror. This is not surprising, since change itself is a hallmark of American culture. Whether it chooses to call itself an observer or not, the American news industry is a full-fledged participant in that culture, as well as in its country\'s democratic political system and its free-market economy.
Protected by government interference by a brief, 200-year-old clause in the American constitution, the press has emerged as the self-appointed monitor of official life, recorder of public events, and even unofficial arbiter of public behavior. The U.S. news industry is also a very big business. Daily newspapers alone generate some $32 billion in advertising revenue a year. Magazines - and there are more than 11,000 of them -- circulate more copies than there are Americans to read them. Every household has at least three radios, and more than 95 percent own televisions.
Needless to say, the press was not always such a mass medium. The American press started in the 18th century as a small instrument of the literate elite and an unapologetic participant in partisan politics. It was a pamphleteering press, operated by colonial postmasters and opinionated printers. It was not for at least another century that the American press had transformed itself into a fairly nonideological communications instrument, in step with the desires, dynamism, and diversity of the country itself.
But change notwithstanding, the American press has maintained two fundamental constants over the past two centuries: (1) its independence from government, and (2) its reliance on public acceptance - if not approval - for its financial survival.
Today, the press is better known as the media - the plural for \"medium\" (or means of conveyance) and a reflection of its many components in the electronic age. For it is no longer the written word but sight and sound that dominate the communications industry.
Nearly every American town of any size (10,000 population or more) still has its own newspaper and access to a metropolitan daily as well.
The story of the American press is a complex one, reflecting the pluralism of the country itself. A favored description is diversity. Nevertheless, there are some common threads that bind the media in the United States. Here are some of the most important of its common traits:
• The American news industry is a business.
• The industry views itself as a public trust.
• The news industry is largely unregulated.
• There is no uniform definition of news.
• The mainstream press is generally nonideological.
• America\'s press tradition is community based.
The aim of this work is to analyze the influence of American Press on Mass consciousness.
The given aim predetermines the concrete tasks of the research:
- to describe the history of American press;
- to consider the most famous American newspapers;
- to investigate the role of Press in the Mass Culture;
- to consider advertising in Press.
The work consists of introduction, four chapters, a conclusion and the list of used literature.ЗаключениеThe American press enjoys its role as the \"watchdog of government.\" The power that comes from this largely self-appointed role has earned the press the honorific title \"the fourth estate,\" after the three official branches of government (legislative, judicial, and executive). It is also this role that prompted Thomas Jefferson, one of the founders of American democracy, to say some 200 years ago that if he had to choose between government without newspapers or newspapers without government, he \"should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.\"
The American news media enjoy a certain immunity from official reprisal. It is extremely difficult, for example, for a public official to win a libel suit against the media, because the courts have ruled that government servants must be open to special scrutiny and accountability in a democratic system. American journalists have also won a number of battles to protect the anonymity of news sources from government inquiry, but that war periodically erupts.
The American media is far more vulnerable to legal action from private citizens, whose right to privacy can be in direct confrontation with what the press calls the public\'s \"right to know.\" Libel is a civil rather than a criminal offense in the United States, but the enormous size of monetary awards and penalties levied by the courts in recent years has had a \"chilling\" effect on journalistic enterprise, according to many in the news industry.
Credibility surveys vary on the question of who the American people trust more -- their press or their government. The answer varies with time and circumstance. Following the Watergate scandal in the early 1970s, the press enjoyed a high degree of public confidence. But following scandal coverage that led to a senator\'s withdrawal from the 1988 presidential race, the press came under sharp criticism on charges of exceeding the bounds of good taste and privacy.
There is no universally accepted definition or set of definitions for \"news\" in the American media. This is because there is no single role designated for the press. Among the roles the American press has chosen for itself are to inform, to educate, to reform, to entertain, to incite, or all of the above.
Within a broad range of definitions, however, there is general agreement as to what is newsworthy and what is not. The most prevalent characteristics include: the activity of officials and celebrities; government action of any kind; events that are new or bizarre (such as crime and disaster); revelations that are titillating or shocking (involving sex and scandal); and new social trends.
Emphasis on the unusual is a mainstay of modern American journalism, explained by the adage: \"If dog bites man, it is not news; if man bites dog, that\'s news.\" The public tends to have a love-hate relationship with this definition. On one hand, the audience is entertained or provoked by the news; on the other hand, it is resentful that \"normal life\" tends to be ignored.
There was a time in America when few would argue with the cantankerous editor who declared: \"News is what I say it is.\" With renewed attention to the desires of the buying public, such editors are hard to find today.
In an effort to be more useful and relevant to the buyer, one of the most successful innovations in recent years has been to enlist the press in the cause of consumer service -- investigating buyer complaints, exposing business fraud, and offering marketplace advice.
Perhaps the greatest source of pride in American journalism is the tradition of investigative reporting, largely aimed at exposing abuses of power. The Pulitzer Prize, the most coveted award in American journalism, is given annually for superior investigation and public service. In recent years, the business community has come under the kind of press scrutiny that was traditionally reserved for government, even though access to business information is usually harder to obtain.
During this century, the mainstream media in the United States have remained largely non-ideological. Very few mass-circulation papers, magazines, and broadcast stations are affiliated with political organizations, parties, or movements. It was not always so, but purposeful nonaffiliation has been a hallmark of the American press for more than a century. This characteristic - both a source of professional pride and a result of economic self-sufficiency - is one of the main features that distinguishes the American press from many others around the world.
Although most papers, and some stations, voice a political preference in their editorials, news reporting is generally nonpartisan. Editorial opinion is often based on the merits of an issue, and it is not unusual for these opinions to stray outside a particular ideological framework.
Not everyone believes the American press is free of ideology. Conservative critics say the American news media - particularly those based in New York and Washington - reflect a \"liberal bias.\" By that they generally mean that the press is too quick to criticize authority and does not support America\'s interests.
Left-of-center critics, on the other hand, accuse the press of government cronyism and uncritical reporting about Washington\'s policies and practices. American journalists tend to feel most comfortable when attacked by both sides of the ideological spectrum. They believe it confirms their impartiality.
In fact, there is a pattern of political preference within the news industry, albeit undeclared. Studies have shown that American reporters tend to be more liberal than editors and program directors, who, in turn, tend to be more liberal than publishers and station owners. These leanings may rarely be visible to the public, but instead are part of the dynamic tension that pervades the American newsroom.
Traditionally, the U.S. government has stayed out of the news business. The only government-owned or -controlled media in the United States are those that broadcast overseas, such as the Voice of America. By law, this service is not allowed to broadcast within the borders of the United States, so most Americans have had only peripheral exposure to it.
There is partial government subsidy of public television and radio in the United States, but safeguards have been built against political interference. As a matter of fact, public broadcasting news programs tend to be more anti-establishment than those of commercial broadcasting and are thus perceived as being more critical of government.
The American press has always had a local, rather than a regional or national, character. Although new technology has broadened this horizon considerably, the U.S. media still concentrate to a large degree on the needs and interests of viewers, listeners, and readers in the immediate neighborhood. There are strong economic reasons for this, but it is also a reflection of American provincialism.
The history of the United States is streaked with isolationism, and the press has often reflected this inwardness. Actually, studies have shown that most of the world\'s press systems tend to be more provincial than international.
One of the most common complaints of visitors to the United States is that there is so little international news relative to America\'s strong presence around the world. In fact, there is a great deal of international news reaching America, but only a small portion of it is carried by the community-focused mass media. And that portion carried in one community may not be carried in another because of the different interests of the residents.
For example, in Chicago there is a large Polish-American population, and consequently the press there gives prominence to news of Eastern Europe. Since New York has a large Jewish population, Mideast news is big there. Also, much of the international news reaching the States finds its way to specialized publications with limited circulation.
It is true that the American correspondent corps is based in fewer than one-half of the world\'s nations. Most of the approximately 700 foreign correspondents are clustered in the so-called major capitals. Consequently, most foreign news is reported from and is written under these datelines.
American correspondents are also frequent targets of criticism that they are not fully prepared in language or in background to cover a foreign country in depth. But the days are gone when a reporter was snatched off the police beat to cover an event in some far-off land.
American correspondents are better prepared for their assignments than they were just 10 years ago, although their employers still tend to favor general professional competence over geographic specialization. One reason for this is the requirement of mobility. A reporter in Cairo, for example, has to be ready at a moment\'s notice to cover a major event anywhere in North Africa or the Middle East because the U.S. correspondent corps is stretched so thinly around the globe.
The size and scope of the overseas press corps is largely an economic issue. To keep one correspondent abroad costs an average of $250,000 a year.
As a general rule, the American press does a fairly thorough job of covering the \"big story\" overseas, tailored to an American audience. But it gives little attention to the day-to-day news abroad, and it does not cater to the foreign audience.
More than 90 percent of America\'s daily newspapers depend on the news agencies (wire services), primarily the Associated Press, for news of the world outside their own regions. This is because only a handful of the largest newspapers have their own national and foreign staffs. They include the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, the Chicago Tribune, the Los Angeles Times, the Baltimore Sun, the Boston Globe, and the Christian Science Monitor. Most of these papers have established their own news services, thus giving newspapers more choices than they have had in the past. This profusion of select services is given as a prime reason that United Press International (UPI) has lost so many customers in recent years.
Some critics of American news coverage abroad detect an inordinate amount of coverage priority given to countries high on Washington\'s official agenda. But they stand on less firm ground when they argue that coverage and commentary mostly conform to U.S. foreign policy objectives. There are just too many examples to the contrary, stretching from Central America back to Vietnam.
For better or for worse, the American media will remain a strong force in public life. Modern society has become too dependent upon quick and reliable information for it to be otherwise. But the shape of that future remains uncertain.
In just a handful of years, the American news business has already undergone tremendous changes as a result of a transformation in technology, market forces, and public tastes. Too many new players have entered the information field for journalism to ever be the same as it was. But the profession never really stood still for long anyway.
The daily newspaper industry, trying to catch up with the electronic media and other newcomers, seems to have suffered most in this recent transformation. But as long as the American press remains largely immune from government interference, there will always be new opportunities for the industry and new choices for the public.Литература1. \"Acts of Hatred, Hints of Doubt,\" John Burns, New York Times, April 1, 2004
2. Allan M. Siegal and William G. Connolly.The New York Times Manual of Style and Usage, revised edition. New York: Times Books, 1999.
3. Abu Muher, quoted in \"Fallujah Residents Report U.S. Forces Engaged in Collective Punishment,\" News Standard, Dahr Jamaril, Apr 23, 2004
4. \"A Response to Fallujah,\" Washington Post, unsigned op-ed, April 1, 2004
5. Berry; Nicholas O. Foreign Policy and the Press: An Analysis of the New York Times\' Coverage of U.S. Foreign Policy (Greenwood. 1990)
6. Davis Elmer. History of the New York Times, 1851-1921
7. David Brock The Republican Noise Machine: Right-Wing Media and How It Corrupts Democracy, Washington, 2003
8. Dante Chinni The Washington Times\'s role, WASHINGTON 2002
9. \"Cluster Bombs in Falluja, Harassment of Patients by Soldiers,\" Dahr Jamail, April 19, 2004
10. Emery, Michael C. The Press and America: an interpretive history of the mass media./ Michael Emery, Edwin Emery, Nancy L. Roberts, USA, 2000
11. \"General Vows to Hunt Killers, Retake Fallujah,\" Chicago Tribune, April 2, 2004
12. Hess, John. My Times: A Memoir of Dissent, Seven Stories Press (2003), cloth,; trade paperback, Seven Stories Press (2003)
13. Deni Elliott The Clash of the Paradigms Monday, February 20, 2006
14. \"Descent into Carnage in a Hostile City,\" Washington Post, Sewall Chan, April 1, 2004
15. \"Iraq violence drives thriving business,\" Chicago Tribune, Kristen Schanberg, Mike Dorning, April 2, 2004
16. \"Iraqi Mob Mutilates 4 American Civilians,\" Chicago Tribune, Colin McMahon, April 1, 2004
17. \"Iraqi Minister of Health presses Bremer and IGC to explain U.S. Targeting of Ambulances in Falluja,\" Dahr Jamail, April 17, 2004
18. \"Four Americans Mutilated,\" the Washington Times, April 1, 2004
19. Freedman Allan Is the time right for the Times?// Columbia Journalism Review, 2003
20. \"Families of Men Slain by Mob Focus on Their Lives, Not How They Died,\" New York Times, Abby Goodnough, Michael Luo, April 3, 2004
21. \"Fallujah Doctors Report U.S. Forces Obstructed Medical Care in April,\" News Standard, Dahr Jamail, May 21, 20
22. \"Horror at Fallujah,\" San Francisco Chronicle, Colin Freeman, April 1, 2004
23. \"4 From US Killed in Ambush in Iraq; Mob Drags Bodies,\" New York Times, Jeffrey Gettleman, April 1, 2004
24. \"4 From US Killed in Ambush in Iraq; Mob Drags Bodies,\" New York Times, Jeffrey Gettleman, April 1, 2004
25. \"7 of Top 20 Papers Published Front-Page Fallujah Body Photos,\" E&P News, Charles Geraci, April 1, 2004
26. Jones, Alex S. and Susan E. Tifft. The Trust: The Private and Powerful Family Behind The New York Times. Back Bay Books (2000).
27. \"Killing Iraq with Kindness,\" New York Times, Ian Buruma, March 17, 2004
28. Matthew Engel Where newspaper journalism is dying British Journalism Review Vol. 14, No. 1, 2003, pages 17-22
29. \"Marines Battle guerrillas in streets of Falluja,\" New York Times, Eric Schmitt, April 9, 2004
30. \"Marines Use Low-Tech Skill to Kill 100 in Urban Battle,\" New York Times, Jeffrey Gettleman, April 15, 2004
31. \"US Marines Shoot Ambulances in Fallujah,\" Democracy Now! April 13, 2004
32. Mnookin, Seth. Hard News: The Scandals at The New York Times and Their Random House Meaning for American Media, (2004).
33. \"One Year Later,\" New York Times, Unsigned editorial, March 19, 2004
34. Scott Sherman Donald Graham\'s Washington Post. WASHINGTON 2002
35. \"Slain Contractors Were in Iraq Working Security Detail,\" the Washington Post, Dana Priest and Mary Pat Flaherty, April 2, 2004
36. \"Slaughtering Civilians in Falluja,\" Dahr Jamail, April 11, 2004
37. Talese, Gay. The Kingdom and the Power, World Publishing Company, New York, Cleveland (1969).
38. \"Troops Hold Fire for Negotiations at 3 Iraqi Cities, \" New York Times, John Burns, April 12, 2004
39. \"To Portray the Horrors, News Media Agonize,\" New York Times, Bill Carter and Jacques Steinberg, April 1, 2004
40. \"Up to 12 Marines Die in Raid on Their Base AS Fierce Fighting Spreads to 6 Iraqi cities,\" New York Times, Jeffrey Gettleman and Douglass Jehl, April 7, 2004
41. \"Violent Response: the US army in al-Falluja,\" Human Rights Watch, June 2003
42. \"When do we begin calling this a War again?\" Dahr Jamail, April 9, 2004
43. \"Why America Won\'t Cut and Run,\" Chicago Tribune, unsigned op-ed, April 1, 2004'
|
|
