Talk:News values

Article naming

I think the word "value" is the most helpful term. Each news value that is present within a news story adds value to its newsworthiness. The more news values, the more likely a news story will be published. So, in this respect we are using the word "value" in much the same way as an economist would. However, the term "news values" is also used in an ethical sense to justify good practice such as accuracy and truthfulness in a story. Some publishers and broadcasters, e.g. the BBC and AP have issued such guidelines under the title "news values". The lesser used alternative "news criteria" is less confusing, but in the end, I believe common usage wins the argument. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yawja (talk • contribs) 08:53, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

The use of the word "values" seem rather odd. The more standard term for this would be something like News editorial policy, or Journalism editorial policy. We have a good journalism category developing on Wikipedia, maybe this should join that universe of articles, it would be a natural fit. The word "values" is too much owned by the right wing, "family values" and other such key buzz words of theirs and wikipedia articles are to follow the NPOV guidlines which I support. Ref:. Wikipedia:What wikipedia is not.Calicocat 02:19, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

"News Values" is a by far the most common term used to describe this, at least here in Australia. You may have a negative reaction to it, but the term is the best title.matturn 02:09, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

Regading the usage of the term "news values", I have to agree that the term is in common usage. When studying international journalism and the sociology of journalism as part of my degree, the term came up frequently. I happen to think this entire article is well balanced and can't see fault with it. --83.151.227.107 16:56, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

I think this artcile could be expanded to include more points of view from other countries. Notice for example the many similar codes of ethics shared by other countries. Ref. journalism ethics and standards, Journalism.

This isn't a list of ethics, it's a list of what interests people. By all means have lists of ethics somewhere else, or mention here what people in non-Norweigan places are interested in.matturn 02:09, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

I have to do a media exam and my teachers repeatidly say "news values"............... News values are crucial in understanding the production of news and the choices that producers make. Every industry has its unique jargon, and in journalism the words "news values" are universally understood to mean factors that make a story newsworthy. This comes from a journalism professor and still-active reporter.

News Value(s) works. Another related term is Production Value - roughly corresponding to how pristinely produced is the video, graphics, pictures, printing quality, etc.

Rick 14:58, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Agree "news values" is the predominant term, since it was coined by Galtung and Ruge, whose article is among the most widely cited in this area. But it's worth pointing out that there's a bit of ambiguity surrounding the term. Herbert Gans, a prominent sociologist who studies news, used the term "news values" in a different way, to refer to values held by journalists (or their sources) that influence how they report a story. Contrast this with Galtung and Ruge's version, which concerns aspects of an event that make it more or less newsworthy. Gans does make a list of Galtung-and-Ruge-style news values (see my comment downthread), but doesn't call them "news values." In point of fact, he doesn't give a neat title to his own list, so he doesn't really offer a substitute term. Charlotte Ryan, and a few others, use the term "news criteria" interchangeably with "news values," both of which, for them, have identical meaning. Wideaperture (talk) 14:27, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

A couple other things worth adding. One is to describe the hypotheses that are commonly associated with news values, first put forward by G&R and later formalized by Oystein Sande (1971, Journal of Peace Research, 8,3/4, "The Perception of Foreign News."). These are selection, distortion, replication, additivity, and complementarity. The second thing worth adding is a section on criticisms of news values, of which there are many. I'm writing a paper currently that deals with both these issues and when I'm finished I'm happy to come and update the article with these things, if someone hasn't already taken a crack at it. Wideaperture (talk) 15:13, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

References

Issue with Intro

The article has a NPOV problem. The opening sentence which reads "News values determine how much prominence a news story is given by a media outlet." implies that "news values" play the only role determining a stories prominence for most or all media outlets. This ignores common accusations that bias and political considerations also play into what prominence a story is given by many or all media outlets and thus while "news values" are a significant factor they are not always the sole or major factor. The opening should probably be rewritten to make it clear that "news values" are a significant factor in many cases without implying they are always the sole factor or at least the major factor. There should also be a brief mention of the accusations of bias and political considerations as playing an unfair/unethical role in the process. Another problem with this article is it seems to be written from the standpoint of media outlets that enjoy freedom of the press and ignores censored state-run and state-censored private media outlets in non-democratic countries. We need to at least be clearer that these guidelines don't necessary apply in the same manner to the media outlets of all countries. --Cab88 09:00, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

If political, ideological, or other considerations affect what is in the news, then arguably that makes them news values too. Are news values just what the public is interested in, or do they encompass the desires of all influential parties? matturn 11:59, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

The article doesn´t only talk about what people are interested in. It reminds us how the readyness of an editorial office affects what´s in the news. The time tables of editors have nothing to do with interests of the audience. That´s why I agree that political and ideological considerations should also be mentioned in the article. - Petja

Hi. I have sought to broaden and update the scope of this article to reflect the extensive amount of work that has been done in this field in the last 30 years. I have borne in mind that this is an encyclopedia article and therefore merely summarised positions rather than go into great detail which could encroach on the intellectual property of sources used. I hope this moves us toward solving the NPOV issue, at least to some degree, and would welcome other suggestions. --veggy 12:47, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

It's worth pointing out that Galtung and Ruge's original article on news values was an attempt at a set of news values that would apply across cultures. Their twelve news values are about things like timeliness and cultural similarity that don't presuppose a particular national origin. Subsequent lists of news values have been more culturally specific - some almost absurdly so. Perhaps the solution is to point out in the article that, among the many lists, some are culturally specific and others less so. Wideaperture (talk) 14:27, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

More Reference

At one point "Gatekeeping" was tightly related to "News Value"

Here is what I come up with as frequent citations, however I have not read any:

Articles:

White, David Manning. (1950). "The 'Gatekeeper': A Case Study In the Selection of News Journalism Quarterly

Bleske, Glen L., "Ms. Gates Takes Over: an updated version of a 1949 case study," Newspaper Research Journal, v. 12 no. 4 pp. 88-97.

Books:

The American Journalist: A Portrait of U.S. News People and Their Work (Paperback) by David H. Weaver, G. Cleveland Wilhoit

Making news: A study in the construction of reality by Gaye Tuchman

Deciding What's News: A Study of CBS Evening News, NBC Nightly News, Newsweek, and Time (Medill Visions of the American Press) by Herbert J. Gans

All of the above are dated but perhaps they can be brought forward? Rick 05:32, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

It says Making news: A study in the construction of reality by Gaye Tuchman. What does this mean?

I've read Making News and Deciding What's News, or large portions of them, anyway. They're both sociological approaches to understanding newsroom decisions. Tuchman actually avoids making extensive lists of news values, but instead emphasizes the process through which news is produced, chalking news decisions up to a combination of allocation of an organization's limited resources, and office politics. Gans, on the other hand, produces a book full of lists - of news values and other things. Harcup and O'Neill, who are already cited in the article, give a nice summary, though, of his list of news values:

Gans argues that domestic news stories become “important” by satisfying one or more of the following criteria: rank in government and other hierarchies; impact on the nation and the national interest; impact on large numbers of people; and significance for the past and future. Similarly, stories are deemed “interesting” if they conform to one or more types which Gans lists as: people stories; role reversals; human interest stories; expose anecdotes; hero stories; and “gee whiz” stories. (p. 266)

Interestingly, while this list of criteria corresponds to what are traditionally termed "news values," Gans doesn't use the term. He does use the term "news values" elsewhere, but in an unrelated context, to refer to the values held by journalists (or their sources), which help them decide what's newsworthy - as opposed to the traditional definition, which refers to aspects of an issue or event that make it more newsworthy.

The books listed may be dated, but they're still some of the seminal works. I would also add to the pile of books, the following:

Prime Time Activism (1991) by Charlotte Ryan

Wideaperture (talk) 14:13, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

"Frequency" or "Currency"?

I think the term "frequency" in the first bullet point should probably be "currency," or "timeliness." Frequency has to do with how often something occurs, whereas both "currency" and "timeliness" have to do with how relevant something is at the moment. 68.165.120.238 (talk) 13:59, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

"Frequency" is the term used by Galtung & Ruge for a reason. Namely, the criterion specified that an event was most likely to be covered if it unfolded within a time span that synched well with the production cycle of the media outlet covering it. That said, many subsequent authors have adapted the term to mean "currency" or "timeliness." And some alternative lists of news values use the terms "currency" or "timeliness" in place of frequency. In other words, the question here is whether to preserve the nuance of the original authors or go with an alternative term/usage that has become common.

Wideaperture (talk) 21:11, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Article issues

I just removed a section containing a long list directly lifted from its source.

Also noticing that only a couple bulletpoints in the section "Conditions for News" contain sources. Any reason to think the rest isn't WP:OR?

Also surprised to see an entire section for evolutionary psychology based on a single source. This seems like WP:UNDUE weight, but maybe I'm just not aware of the prevalence of evolutionary psychology in journalism literature? — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 03:16, 9 March 2017 (UTC)