mystudenttalk-blog

[mystudenttalk-blog]

The Development of Media Reception

Alix Boyd The audiences reception of different forms of media is reliant on a variety of different factors. According to John L. Sullivan, the response to media mostly relies on three main factors:

physical context - the actual, physical space in which you are experiencing the media that is being presented to you (location) social context - the people that are around you and the relationships you have to those people and the relationship you have to things in your physical setting while being a media observer the media and its relation to time - the time in which you are experiencing media (ex. Does the media you are exposed to happen at the same time everyday or is there a time-shift?)

These certain attributes seem to result in a different response to certain medias depending on their circumstances (163-164). For example, in the article “The influences of sports viewing conditions on enjoyment from watching televised sports: An analysis of the FIFA World Cup audiences in theater vs. home”, Kihan Kim, Yunjae Cheong, nd Hyuksoo Kim examine the affects of these three attributes on sports viewers. The assessors examine the audience reception conditions made apparent by Sullivan subconsciously. Instead of dividing the sport viewing conditions into physical context, social context and the media in its relation to time, the assessors focus on the influences of sports related media in the home verses in a social setting and how suspense is amplified with the inclusion of other users. The end of the study and analysis proved that a combination of physical space, and the social demeanour of the space resulted in a different reception and different audience attitude toward the sports game that was being presented (389-406). 

Sullivan highlights three main factors that influence audience reception of media but also includes many other influences on the audiences reception of certain types of media. He discusses the affects of gender on media users and how gender is even expressed in forms of technology. Sullivan also evaluates the affects of media in a domestic household (169-175). What Sullivan fails to note is the ability for media to affect people of many different ages in very individual and unique ways. Although many of the receptions of media do break down into Sullivan’s three main concepts of reception (even in children), I would argue that children and young adults are more heavily influenced by certain sources of media and are more likely to respond in obscure, and absolutely distinctive ways. Children, even if socialized, may have an altered perception of what the public sphere consists of. Many children’s receptions to media may be influenced by physical, social, and time-conscious aspects but in a negative way. For example, when watching a television show with a family much different then theres, the physical bond to their concrete home may be broken, and the social bond between family members may be hindered. I will argue that a child’s reception to media is much more uncertain than an adults reception to media. 

The picture above was posted by a friend on my Facebook page. Although the picture may be perceived as humorous due to the original comments made, I was more interested in the actions of the children in particular. I remember when I was a child and it was typical for me to play ‘house’. I was emulating the type of families I had seen on television such as on the show “Arthur”. I related the character Arthur’s friends and experiences to my own physical and social contexts. The show featured a group of nine animated friends who went out and had various adventures while in the care of their parents. Each animated family was the subsequent picture of the American dream. My family and social life was unlike the one I perceived on “Arthur” and therefore, my game of house was altered minimally. Instead of a beautiful and elegant family that “Arthur” and many other children’s programs showed, my young friends and I all played ‘house’ with family fights and various internal issues due to our own life experiences. I was able to enjoy that type of media but was also envious of the life that an animated character lived. My physical and social surroundings hindered my media experience and the amount of times “Arthur” was featured on television continuously persuaded me to believe in a seemingly perfect life that I had yet to experience. 

The children in the picture experience a much similar sense of reception as I did to “Arthur” in relation to other various types of media. My friends and I were very eager to imitate a family we had seen on television because we were lead to believe this was the idyllic family; one that was common in the Western society. The repetition of similar, seemingly perfect families on television reinforced the idea that we were not necessarily normal if our family was not simply flawless and quaint. Much like my friends and I, the children featured in the photo were eager to copy what they had seen many times before in different types of various media — tragedy. The age, names, and circumstance of the children in this photo are unknown. However, it is known that they are quite young (due to the size of the child on the ground and also the type of toy car they are playing with in the photo) and are capable of reenacting a car crash off of pure memory and influence. 

Much like in my childhood play experiences, the children in the photo play their game based off of what they have perceived in various forms of media. Unlike these children’s media experience however, my media experience made me believe there were better families around the world. Although my physical self was hurt seeing as I did not have the type of family as seen on television, I was hopeful to believe through these various programs that the world contained something other than anger. These children were most likely exposed to this violent type of media in the comfort of their own home and on more than one occurrence. This may have lead the children to believe that tragedy (although very common in some life) is a regular aspect of all life. Instead of playing an innocent game such as house, the young children were influenced by the nature of the television they had experienced. Having not been properly socialized and only experiencing minimal physical surroundings such as home, and school, these children were not able to accept and receive the type of media being displayed as an individual happening instead of a vital feature of life. 

The thing that is most interesting to me about these children’s reception of violent media was that it was entirely displayed as simply a game. The children both do not realize the seriousness of the occurrence and choose to show their understanding of it through the only way they know how. Of course, when relating this to an adults reception of media, it is extremely different. In relation to Sullivan’s thoughts of media reception, adults may feel a sense of comfort watching these violent acts on television from the comfort of their living room. They may vocalize their opinions in relation to the tragedy within a social setting and express how saddened each individual is by the occurrence. In relation to media times, an adult audience may see something consistently on television over a vast time period or may continuously see it on social media at different moments. This may have the ability to increase and strengthen the relationship one has to the specific thing they are viewing. In most cases, adults will fully react to violent media in many different ways but will still not be able to create a game out of a tragedy like the simple mind of a kid. 

Sullivan failed to introduce the relationship of children to media and its reception in this section of his text “Media Audiences: Effects, Users, Institutions, and Power”. However, Sullivan did address how reception of media has changed over time. I have directed attention to how media reception differs in children than in adults, but I am also curious as to how media reception advances in relation to age and technology. In the twenty-first century, I see how young adults relate to media and respond to it thorough different outlets. Sullivan outlines in many occurrences that there has definitely been a rise in participatory culture. Children, young adults, and adults are mainly all part of the online world and all have the advantage to create user-generated content. In many ways, user-generated content is in response to certain medias whether that media be online news, video games, television shows, movies, and much more (217-219). In many ways, users use the aspects of media reception to alter and better their overall media experiences. 

Sullivan recognizes the people who go above and beyond to cater their media needs as “fans”. In many cases, these people are not fans but instead, unsatisfied with their media experience. I believe that the negative reception of many mediums was the producer of fan fiction which are “short stories [that] often feature existing characters from favourite fan texts, or are written in the creative universe of the original text” (Sullivan, 204). In my experiences with fan fiction, I have recognized it to be an outlet for reception gratification. Many fans will write about the characters in the story in their hometown or situation, personalizing the experiencing and re-emphasizing the importance of physical context reception. In other cases, fans will rewrite the types of media they have experienced in a different social context. On numerous counts, fan fiction will consist of a different ending or outcome for various characters within the media they are encountering. For example, the television show “How I Met Your Mother” received extreme backlash for its ending. Many supposed fans wrote fan fictions which catered to their own individual likings. It is simple for us to change media to our own individual likings as adults and not continually accept it for simply what it is on television, in novels, etc. Our basic reception of media has been advanced through the use of technology. We may originally receive media in basic forms (ex. saddened by a movie where two people get married when you, personally, are not), but we have the ability to change those feelings through use of technology and public opinions. We also have the ability to voice our own personal opinions through the use of technology and change how others think in relation to that media form. 

In cases such as the ones discussed, I have noticed that reception of media changes over time. As a child, it is acceptable for children to experience media has ultimate reality. Without fully understanding the depths of media and the real world, it is easy for children to get misconstrued. They accept media without question, even when it is fictional. As we psychologically and physically progress in age, it is much more common for us to experience media in more personal ways and be able to respond to it and alter it to our own various likings. Although each person is grounded by the three main media receptors discussed by Sullivan, it is crucial to understand that children will experience a physical and/or social aspect of media differently than most adults. 

References Sullivan, J. Media audiences: Effects, users,institutions, and power. Sage, 2013. Kihan, K., Cheong, Y., Kim, H. “The influences of sports viewing conditions on enjoyment from watching televised sports: an analysis of the FIFA world cup audiences in theater vs. home.” Journal of broadcasting & electronic media. 2016. pp. 389-406.

[mystudenttalk-blog]

How Journalism Affects a Mass Audience

By Alix Boyd

In the twenty-first century, news has become readily available through many different outlets. In my opinion, news broadcasts and even newspaper articles are no longer the most reliable source for valid and informative news. With the development of social media, interactive talk-shows and blogs, public opinion and the importance of the story is no longer left to be decided upon by a variety of manipulated news channels. In other words, the ability to address the public has become widely available and the public sphere is taking advantage of this. In his article “The Double-Edged Sword: The Effects of Journalists’ Social Media Activities on Audience Perceptions of Journalists and Their News Products”, Jayeon Lee outlines what it means to be a journalist. He states that, “The traditional role of journalists as outlined within normative theories is to provide objective and accurate reporting without distorting or intervening in the news”. (p. 313) Lee also goes on to discuss a theory produced by O’Sullivan (2005) which states the reason social media news has more of an impact on its viewers than a regular news outlet. In a social media setting, many have the ability to discuss their views with the masses but in a more personal way. The news found on social media is not bound to a strict story but instead, relies upon users to take that story and comment on it, add their own judgment and produce something more emotional and relatable than a typical news outlet. O’Sullivan calls this “masspersonal” communication. (p.313) In other words, the art of journalism has become unpopular when compared to social media news outlets.

In my opinion, journalism still has the capability to be captivating and interesting to its audience. It definitely has the ability to entertain the idea of masspersonal communication in many circumstances. Webster’s dictionary defines a journalist as: A. A person engaged in journalism; especially: a writer or editor for a news medium B. A writer who aims at a mass audience When addressing this definition of journalism, it is apparent to me that journalism is often part of but not limited to major news outlets. In my opinion, journalism has more to do with the art of public address and addressing, much like the definition states, a mass audience. It is not strictly based upon a written piece of work pertaining to a news story. Instead, the work of journalists has the ability to be crafted into a wide range of forms and mediums in order to please its audience. In the twenty-first century, journalism has taken on many different forms, some I would argue extremely effective to its audience members.

On October 13th, 2017, an article was circulated in the New York Times in relation to gun laws in the United States. The article written by The Editorial Board and titled “Gun Carnage Is  a Public Health Crisis” spoke of the Las Vegas shooting (2017) and the ability government had to prevent that situation. The article provided evidence to support the argument against guns in the United States and was extremely informative and factual. The article, found on The New York Times website, was easily accessible and quite short and precise. However, it lacked a personal relationship with its audience. Although it paid reference to some events that many had personally experienced, the article was quick to ignore the emotional impacts of these acts. It also lacked personal commentary and judgment which many audience members do crave. This type of journalism may be reliable and credible but does not give each audience member what they are necessarily looking for when reading a public address piece. When comparing a written piece like this to social media where opinions vary and many diverse arguments are formed, it is easy to see which may be favoured. However, when comparing a social media news outlet to a form of journalism more socially accepted and interesting, both may be evenly appreciated by its audience members.

When addressing and informing an audience, the act of communicating and how the speaker/writer is communicating is extremely important. In Charles Horton Cooley’s books Human Nature and the Social order (1902) and Social Organization: A Study of the Larger Mind (1909), Cooley examines the concept of communication. To Cooley, communication was “the mechanism through which human relations exist and develop - all the symbols of the mind, together with the means of conveying them through space and preserving them in time. It includes the expression of the face, attitude, and gesture, the tons of the voice, words, writing, printing, railways, telegraphs, telephones, and whatever else may be the latest achievement in the conquest of space and time.” (Sullivan, p. 27) Cooley mentions that communication is often provided through the use of certain technology of the time. In the twenty-first century, communicating a message has been made possible through a wide variety of new technological advances including cellphones, computers, and televisions. These advances often please the audience member in different communicative ways. Through these technological advances, new forms of media and journalism have been able to arise. In my opinion, effective journalism and public address caters to all audiences including those who are not satisfied with simply picking up a news paper or finding their story sources on a mainstream news website. To me, journalism and public address is effective when it is produced in a satirical manner with speech and in some cases, visuals. When journalism is done in this way, it provides a different outlet for public opinion and identifies issues without such harsh language and without strictly focusing on factual evidence within the manner. In this form of journalism, a journalist may experience a connection to his/her audience through emotion as well as factual information.

The comedian Jim Jeffries does a comedic bit titled “Gun Control” (2015). Like the article written by The Editorial board for The New York Times, this comedic bit criticized the failure to impose new gun laws after major shootings within the United States. Although this bit was featured on a comedy network on television and was performed by a comedian, I feel this was a more affective piece of journalism on the topic of gun laws than the “Gun Carnage Is a Public Health Crisis” article. The reason behind my this though mainly lays in the aspect of effective communication outlined by Cooley. Jeffries had the ability to take a serious manner and make it entertaining for all audiences. Because it was not a written piece for the public sphere to read, he had the ability to add his own emotion through his tone of voice and word choice. Some of his emotion catered to his anger for the governments inability to be proactive in creating new gun laws and some of his emotion sprang from his true concern for his country. However, all this emotion assisted in his argument and also, added inexcusable humour. In this case of public address and journalism, Jeffries had the ability to affect a mass audience by satirizing a common interest and disturbance in the United States. Much like The New York Times article, Jeffries added facts that informed his audience of the truth behind his argument and address. He did not shy away from exposing the reality behind gun danger and even took some time in his comedic speech to criticize the people who appreciated gun laws and did not feel the need for them to be changed. Much like on a social media platform, Jeffries shared his views openly which is why I believe the response to his address was so positive. The inclusion of facts and emotion brought his version of journalism and reporting to a new level. Many comedians are like Jeffries in the way that they make news and public issues comical, however, some use more than words to convey their opinion.

In types of journalism such as talk shows, more than just a matter of speech is important. Communication is still a vital role in conveying messages appropriately and accurately to audience members but during comedic and satirical talk shows, other aspects of technology and media influence are heavily relied upon. On The Late Show starring Stephen Colbert, Colbert does a comedic bit which, again, pertains to gun laws. Titled “Stephen Colbert Takes The Gloves Off: Gun Control”, the sketch exposes the United States governments inability to act efficiently to prevent tragedies which include guns. He gives facts based on the governments involvement in gun laws and indicates their stupidity in denying any tragedy prevention implementations. (2016) Unlike “Gun Control” by Jim Jeffries and “Gun Carnage Is a Public Health Crisis” written by The Editorial Board on The New York Times, this type of journalism used different aspects of media to convey meaning. Instead of solely focusing on his power of speech, Colbert used media tactics to influence his argument and also had humour. For example, Colbert used newspaper headliners leading up to the vote on gun laws in the senate to show the votes failure and to expose, what he feels, is the despair of his society. He compared these headlines to one revolving around the famous celebrity and singer, Justin Bieber, which showed the irrelevance and, as he described, the hopelessness he felt. The use of outside media in his talk show was important for many reasons; one being the audiences relationship to this outside media. Colbert took common journalism that is often seen as irrelevant or boring and made it a part of something comedic, enjoyable, and still educational. Colbert used a variety of materials and tactics to make his level of journalism fun and exciting to his audience. Colbert’s message still came across to his viewers and I would assume he made an impact to many including me.

In the case of Stephen Colbert and his piece on gun laws, there were many gratifications to the viewers and active audience members - more than each article and bit listed in this blog. Although Colbert invited his audience to appreciate his argument and experience judgment in relation to it, he did not provide all gratifications of new technology. I felt most satisfied watching and reacting to his news outlet because of all the different tactics he used to supply his data. However, it is still understandable why social media would be a more acceptable to and appreciated by audience members. In the case of social media, many have the ability to experience what they did through each form of news outlet provided in this blog. Instead of only thinking about their connection to the piece though, they can respond to it and create posts in relation to it.

Overall, I believe that different forms of journalism have proven effective and influential. Journalists can vary in their tactics to amuse their audience which is why journalism is an art to be appreciated. I do not argue with the idea that social media is a more effective and personal outlet for news. However, I will argue that journalism and certain journalists ideas and tactics of public address can have a similar impact on the viewer as social media. Audience members may experience gratifications from television shows or written news articles that they may not experience from social media and vice versa. It is all a matter of perspective on the case.

References Colbert, S. (2016, Jun 22). Stephen Colbert takes the gloves off: Gun control. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=buFbk5fQCRc

Jeffries, J. (2015, Oct 9). Gun control. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch? v=0rR9IaXH1M0

Lee, J. (2015) The double-edged sword: The effects of journalists’ social media activities on audience perceptions of journalists and their news products. In Journal of computer- mediated communication. (Vol 20, pp. 312-329). Bethlehem, PA.

Sullivan, J. (2013). Effects of media messages. In Media audiences:Effects, users, institutions and power. Sage publications: United States of America. (pp. 25-52)

The Editorial Board. (2017, Oct 13). Gun carnage is a public health crisis. The New York Times.

[mystudenttalk-blog]

Deciding Our Own News

By Alix Boyd

Audience power has grown immensely over an extensive amount of time and it continues to change daily. During early audience experiences, importance was heavily placed on the aspect of time and space. The introduction of the Greek alphabet somewhere during 700BC was meant to change how inhabitants communicated. However, with the high price of materials, oral communication remained key to those interested in public affairs. Greek and Roman audiences regularly gathered in one area to witness a person of power speak about news within their area. Although the news was often communicated effectively, it was merely found at the source of one higher power. Public involvement was encouraged later in time, but news topics were limited and priorly decided upon. (Sullivan, 8-9) With the extensive development of technology, what makes up the concept of ‘news’ is now established and maintained by the public. News is no longer primarily based on societal affairs, economic crisis, and destruction. News is also not primarily decided upon by a person of higher status. In the 21st century, what constitutes news is heavily reliant on public reception and public interest. 

In Ben S. Wasike’s article “Framing News in 140 Characters: How Social Media Editors Frame the News and Interact with Audiences via Twitter”, he discusses how certain media organizations have become dependant on the new age digital and technological advancements. Media corporations and news outlets are now said to analyze certain online social media websites to keep their stories relevant to readers. Wasike argues that the social media site Twitter is the most worth studying by media and news outlets for three reasons:

1. Twitter gives it’s audience an ability to sustain interaction in a unique manner. The posts remain short (merely 140 characters) which gives Twitter users the capability to express their opinions briefly and precisely. This aspect is especially important to social media editors. 2. Twitter allows its users to update the world on news before media outlets have the possibility to respond. Wasike uses the example of the India terrorist attacks in Mumbai on November 6th, 2008 to further explain this concept. ‘Tweets’ surfaced about the incident well before any television program or newspaper could report on it. Therefore, news outlets used Twitter as a tool to gather more data, pictures, videos, etc. on the incident. 3. Twitter allows a relationship from audience to media outlet that may not have developed. With the arising distrust in news outlets, many people are turning to social media for their news updates. By studying Twitter, news and media outlets are learning to use social media sites to their advantage. It is becoming extremely common for news outlets to update Twitter before adding the story to their website or television program. This platform for spreading and partaking in news is quick, effective, and reliable. (Wasike, 6-7)

Wasike’s article proves the relevance of audience members in constituting what news is. Mayer (2009) goes as far to say that “danger … arises when journalists distance themselves from their audiences …” (Wasike, 12) Mayer goes on to suggest that journalists must interact with their audience members in order to suit their personal needs as viewers. The job of the news agency now is to make sure that individuals feel particularly connected to the news that they are viewing and responding to. (Wasike, 12)

William J. Brown also pays close attention to the importance of audience involvement in his article “Examining Four Processes of Audience Involvement With Media Personae: Transportation, Parasocial Interaction, Identification, and Worship”. He defines involvement as “the degree of psychological response of a person to a mediated message or persona.” (Brown, 260) Because of the excessive growth in technology, audience involvement has arguably become one of the most important things in news. Nab and Wirth (2008) explore the idea that audience involvement is not only a physical experience but an emotional one as well. Tan (2008) goes on to explain the importance of a well received media message. Your amount of media consumption relies on your overall experience while consuming. (Brown, 260) Brown identifies the four key components to audience involvement. An individual may not experience all four of these components but it is crucial for an effective and involved audience member to come across one in their media intake. The four processes of audience involvement are transportation, parasocial interaction, identification, and worship. Transportation is the idea that audiences become immersed emotionally within a specific story (fictional or nonfictional). Parasocial interaction displays a persons capability to experience a false sense of intimacy to a character or person on television or in the news. Audience members may even go as far as to feel emotionally bonded to this character or person. The process of identification deals with a person who has been heavily influenced in multiple ways (morality, values, etc) by a media figure. The most intense media involvement is a newly discovered audience involvement process called worship. This deals with an audience member becoming completely infatuated with a character or person they see in the media. (Brown, 262-265) 

As an audience member, I have experienced some of Brown’s processes of audience involvement. I have also seen many people experience processes of audience involvement through what they post on social media, and what they tend to speak highly of during face to face interaction. With major natural and manmade disasters happening in the months of September and early October (2017), it seemed only natural that news outlets would instantly report on the events and provide information to their followers. When visiting the CNN news outlet site, I was not surprised in seeing the multiple stories addressing the mass homicide that took place in Las Vegas on October 1st, 2017. The home page was predominantly littered with different articles and personal pieces pertaining to the shooting. For example, one article written by James Masters, Jason Hanna and Paul P. Murphy described the horrors from a personal perspective. The article titled “The Las Vegas heroes who stepped up as chaos reigned” spoke of the victims of the mass shooting but also addressed the men and women who stopped and soon became hero’s of an unfortunate war. One article featured on the CNN website spoke of Jimmy Kimmel’s emotional response to the shooting. Written by Frank Pallotta, this article titled “Jimmy Kimmel gets emotional after shooting in his hometown Las Vegas” strictly addressed the different news coverages of the shooting which were all considered equally emotional. One last article featured on the main homepage was in relation to the gun laws of America and how this mass homicide will affect them. Stephen Collinson wrote “The gun debate, again”  which openly spoke of the terrible, ineffective gun laws in the United States. The articles featured on the CNN website inspired an immediate audience response from me and many others. 

As an audience member, I experienced a sense of transportation while reading various platforms dedicated to the shooting. Although the occurrence was some distance away from my location, I felt emotionally connected to each person affected. On October 2nd, 2017, while further exploring the matter through social media news outlets, I discovered pictures, videos, and posts from various people that were not covered by CNN which made me feel even more linked to the devastation experienced in Las Vegas. As Wasike’s article suggested, many of the posts on Twitter, Facebook and other social media platforms pertaining to the disaster came before the news outlets even had a chance to widely report. Therefore, many were affected by the disaster prior to its exposure on the news and in the mainstream media. I believe that the vulnerability of the occurrence was at its peak because of the amount of people individually reporting on the matter before any press could summarize the events in a short, precise, unemotional story. I, personally, learned of the event VIA Facebook and was shocked by the amateur, vulgar videos I encountered. While reading the crafted news articles, I felt as though I was reading a story and not a single persons encounter. While seeing the videos mainly obtained through a mobile device at the scene, I felt entirely shocked and came to the realization that this situation was, in fact, real life devastation. 

Early morning October 2nd, 2017, the mass shooting in Las Vegas was still fresh in our minds. My news feed on many social media sites was still littered with pictures from the horror that was Las Vegas on October 1st, 2017.  However, later on the day of October 2nd, 2017, the death of Tom Petty took over our news feeds. I was surprised how quickly my news feed turned from pictures of hero’s, victims, and videos of the shooter in Las Vegas to homages to Tom Petty and his musical inspiration. All of a sudden, top news on Twitter and Facebook seemed to highlight the death of the musician over the mass homicide that had just taken place. Top stories on Twitter consisted of news outlets such as Global News commenting on the death of the rockstar. Even CNN featured a major article called “Tom Petty’s rock ’n’ roll was pure” on October 3rd, 2017 written by John Covach. The article focused on the history of the musician and his ultimate demise. When examining the ‘tweets’ and Facebook posts circulating about Tom Petty, I noticed there were easily as many personal stories and coverages as there were about the Las Vegas homicide. I even noticed more of a response from personal Twitter users expressing their condolences to Tom Petty’s family, friends and any aspiring musicians who used his music for inspiration. To me, the response to Tom Petty’s death seemed more personal to many individuals. I think this response has a lot to do with Brown’s idea of the parasocial audience experience. Through his music, a variety of individuals felt a relationship to Tom Petty and therefore, mourned his death much more than those they did not know that lost their lives in the Las Vegas mass homicide. 

With the extreme and immediate uprise of Tom Petty ‘hashtags’, the rockstar took over the media world. Today, October 3rd, 2017, certain videos were going viral of devoted fans playing songs in tribute of the deceased star. The fate of the media world was in the hands of its audience members once more. It seemed as though the sympathy for the Las Vegas victims had been lost and forgotten. Is the death of a rockstar and musical legend really deemed more important than the death of sixty (or more) innocent people? It is important to remember that we decide our own news. What is covered on CNN, Global News, etc. is decided by what its viewers will be most interested in which is overall, determined by hashtags and trends on Twitter and many social media websites. (Wasike, Framing News in 140 Characters: How Social Media Editors Frame the News and Interact with Audiences via Twitter)  The process of audience interaction (Brown, Examining Four Processes of Audience Involvement With Media Personae: Transportation, Parasocial Interaction, Identification, and Worship) has a lot to do with how we connect to news and how we decide as individual audience members and conjoined audience members what constitutes news entirely.

References

Brown, W. Examining four processes of audience involvement with media personae: transportation, parasocial interaction, identification, and worship. Virginia Beach: School of Communications and the Arts, Regent University

Collinson, S. (2017, October 3rd). The gun debate, again. CNN. Retrieved from http:// www.cnn.com/2017/10/02/politics/donald-trump-las-vegas-gun-debate/index.html

Covach, J. (2017, October 3rd). Tom Petty's rock 'n' roll was pure. CNN. Retrieved from http:// www.cnn.com/2017/10/03/opinions/tom-petty-covach/index.html

Hanna, J. Masters, J. Murphy, P. (2017, October 3rd). The Las Vegas heroes who stepped up as chaos reigned. CNN. Retrieved from http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/03/us/las-vegas- shooting-heroes/index.html

Pallotta, F. (2017, October 3rd). Jimmy Kimmel gets emotional after shooting in his hometown Las Vegas. CNN. Retrieved from http://money.cnn.com/2017/10/03/media/jimmy- kimmel-late-night-las-vegas/index.html

Sullivan, J.L. (2013). Media audiences: Effects, users, institutions, and power. California: Sage Publications

Wasike, B. (2013). Framing news in 140 characters: how social media editors frame the news and interact with audiences via Twitter. Global Media Journal - Canadian Edition, 6(1), 5-23.