On Egocasting
Megan and Ryan at HFA discuss "EgoCasting," for which Megan provides the following definition:
They go on to argue that Internet users seek out only the information they want to hear. In contrast, they argue, television viewers can't control what they see to the same degree. If an anti-Bush or anti-Kerry commercial is aired during the evening news, you'll see it whether you want to or not, whereas on the Internet you can just avoid clicking on it.
They have a point, but they exaggerate the difference between the Internet and traditional media. A glance at the blogosphere seems to confirm their argument. Liberal bloggers link almost exclusively to liberal sources, and conservative bloggers link almost exclusively to conservative sources. Also, because most commenters on a blog agree with the blog's ideology, anyone who posts a dissenting viewpoint will be quickly shouted down. That said, however, Internet users are not quite as insulated from dissent as Ryan and Megan think. Unlike television, the Internet allows opportunities for genuine interaction. When you see a statement on television, you can't challenge it and have the television respond to you. When you see a statement on the Internet, you can challenge it and argue back and forth as long as both parties to the debate are willing. Whenever anyone makes an error in logic or fact on a blog, a dozen commenters will immediately point it out. On television and in newspapers, any corrections are generally buried at the end of a program or in small print on a newspaper's back page.
Furthermore, television, newspapers, and radio increasingly allow the same EgoCasting opportunities as the Internet, without the countervailing benefit of interactivity. First, the rise of TiVo may signal the beginning of the end of televised advertising, because viewers will be able to skip past commercials. Second, television stations and newspapers are increasingly appealing to niche markets. Want a conservative viewpoint? Tune in to Bill O'Reilly or read The Washington Times. Want a liberal viewpoint? Watch Keith Olbermann or read The Nation. Many mainstream media outlets claim to appeal to the center (e.g. CNN, The New York Times), but they are under fire from both conservatives and liberals who want to hear something that supports their views. I don't think that Fox News's rise happened despite their ideological leanings, but rather because of them.
In short, Egocasting is a phenomenon that affects all forms of media--but only the Internet allows the kind of real-time, uncontrolled communication that could interfere with a carefully packaged message.
An important psychological consideration in assessing the merits of the Internet as a campaign tool is the concept of “egocasting.” Christine Rosen writes, egocasting is “a world where we exercise an unparalleled degree of control over what we watch and what we hear.” She continues, “We can consciously avoid ideas, sounds, and images that we don’t agree with or don’t enjoy.
They go on to argue that Internet users seek out only the information they want to hear. In contrast, they argue, television viewers can't control what they see to the same degree. If an anti-Bush or anti-Kerry commercial is aired during the evening news, you'll see it whether you want to or not, whereas on the Internet you can just avoid clicking on it.
They have a point, but they exaggerate the difference between the Internet and traditional media. A glance at the blogosphere seems to confirm their argument. Liberal bloggers link almost exclusively to liberal sources, and conservative bloggers link almost exclusively to conservative sources. Also, because most commenters on a blog agree with the blog's ideology, anyone who posts a dissenting viewpoint will be quickly shouted down. That said, however, Internet users are not quite as insulated from dissent as Ryan and Megan think. Unlike television, the Internet allows opportunities for genuine interaction. When you see a statement on television, you can't challenge it and have the television respond to you. When you see a statement on the Internet, you can challenge it and argue back and forth as long as both parties to the debate are willing. Whenever anyone makes an error in logic or fact on a blog, a dozen commenters will immediately point it out. On television and in newspapers, any corrections are generally buried at the end of a program or in small print on a newspaper's back page.
Furthermore, television, newspapers, and radio increasingly allow the same EgoCasting opportunities as the Internet, without the countervailing benefit of interactivity. First, the rise of TiVo may signal the beginning of the end of televised advertising, because viewers will be able to skip past commercials. Second, television stations and newspapers are increasingly appealing to niche markets. Want a conservative viewpoint? Tune in to Bill O'Reilly or read The Washington Times. Want a liberal viewpoint? Watch Keith Olbermann or read The Nation. Many mainstream media outlets claim to appeal to the center (e.g. CNN, The New York Times), but they are under fire from both conservatives and liberals who want to hear something that supports their views. I don't think that Fox News's rise happened despite their ideological leanings, but rather because of them.
In short, Egocasting is a phenomenon that affects all forms of media--but only the Internet allows the kind of real-time, uncontrolled communication that could interfere with a carefully packaged message.
posted by John at 2:02 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home