NewsLab's latest research can help.
It not only pinpoints some of the reasons for declining viewership,
but also offers a roadmap for bringing viewers back. We surveyed
a national sample of 500 people who describe themselves as infrequent
viewers of local TV news.1 These people
told us they either watch less often than they used to, or at most
three nights a week. If stations want to grow their audience, this
group offers substantial potential.
The people we interviewed
are not uninterested in local news, but many of them said they get it elsewhere.
Only 20% of our sample turn to television as their main source of news about
their city or town. Compare that to 15% who said their primary source of local
news is conversations with other people, about the same number who turn to the
radio. The leading source of local news, for more than 40% of our respondents:
the newspaper.2 We also asked how often our
respondents used different sources of news each week. The most frequently used
source was conversations with other people (more than four days per week),
followed by local radio and local newspapers. The Weather Channel and network
newscasts also were more frequently used by our sample than local television
(less than two days per week).3
For several years, people
have been telling researchers they don't watch local TV news because they simply
don't have time. More than a third of the people we surveyed gave similar
reasons-they're either not at home (38%) or asleep (36%) when the news is on-and
they're not just making excuses. We checked, by asking when they got home from
work and when they went to sleep. They really aren't available. There's not much
a station can do to draw those people back, outside of shifting the news to a
more convenient time. But a quarter of our sample (27%) was not only available
at news time, they were even watching television-just something other than the
local news. Those people clearly could watch, if they wanted to.
Many of their reasons for
not watching had to do with the content of the newscasts-something news managers
can change. Some of their complaints are familiar: there's too much crime and
violence on the news. "All you see is horrendous crime, murder, things like
that," one person said. "It's very stressful. And sometimes people just don't
want to deal with that. So many good things are happening out there and
everything has to be about crime or celebrities. I want to hear about the real
people."
Others said the local news
is too negative and sensationalized. "It's depressing," said one
respondent. "They drive the same stories to the ground, over and over." Another
person told us: "I think the stories are sensationalistic. I think they focus on
human tragedy, and they're going for entertainment value." And a large
percentage of our sample called the local news boring and irrelevant: "I used to
watch it a lot but it's gotten so repetitive and so boring, I just turn it off."
Another person told us: "They are always behind about three days, and what they
do tell you, it is as if they are talking to a six year old." They complained
that the local news is "always the same stuff," and said too many of the stories
are fluffy features. "It's too shallow," one person said. "It is more
entertainment than news. They focus on stories that have little impact on my
life."4
So what could bring these
viewers back? Provide more variety, they said. More substance. "Tell the whole
story, not just bits and pieces," one person suggested. "More in-depth and
intelligent stories," said another. A third respondent urged local television
news to "explain more." As another person put it: "I'd like to see them do some
real reporting that is in depth, not to a limited number of people, but to the
entire community."
What specific kinds of
stories are they looking for? Think local, local, local. Three-quarters (76%) of
the people we talked to said they would be a lot or somewhat more likely to
watch if TV news covered more community issues and activities, like special
events, programs for kids, neighborhood cleanups, even local council meetings.
"Current events and things that are happening locally, things that deal with
politics, current things that are happening in cities and counties, how we can
become more a part of the community," one person said. They wanted to know about
events before they happened so they could participate and help. "There is no
sense of being clued in," one person said. Almost as many respondents (72%) said
they'd come back to watch more coverage of local schools. For some people, that
meant reports about testing and teacher training, for others, money and taxes or
school safety. They wanted to know how their schools compared to others, to hear
"both good and bad."
Our respondents also said
they'd watch more health stories and consumer reporting-echoing the findings of
other television news surveys. But the people we talked to defined the health
beat more broadly than many stations do. They wanted to know about good and bad
doctors, about health insurance and nursing homes, not just about the latest
medical "breakthrough." Two-thirds of those we surveyed said they'd watch a lot
or somewhat more local TV news if it covered local business, with an emphasis on
economic growth and jobs. A similar number expressed interest in knowing more
about the environment.
And government was not a
turnoff to these potential viewers. Almost two-thirds (60%) said they'd watch
more news if TV covered city and local government. One person wanted to know
"what our city and government officials are really doing for us, whether or not
they are doing what they said they were going to do." Several others mentioned a
desire to know more about local campaigns and elections. Yet when we asked in
general terms if more coverage of political campaigns and elections would
encourage them to watch more often, the answer was a resounding no. That topic
ranked with crimes, fires, and accidents at the bottom of the list of coverage
they'd tune in for. It appears that viewers may be turned off by the term
"politics" alone, not necessarily by political news.5
These suggestions come from
a national sample, and while it is a representative sample6, different areas of the country may have different
priorities. But the survey indicates a yearning for local television news that
truly informs viewers about the community they live in-not by covering the
latest murder or car crash-but by focusing on news that matters to people. If
you provide it, they say, they will come back.
1. Walter Gantz is
professor of Telecommunication at Indiana University, and analyzed the survey
results.
2. The
telephone survey was conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates in
January-February 2000.
TABLE 1
Q: Where would you say you get most of your news about what's going on in your
city?
| NEWS SOURCE |
PERCENT |
| Newspapers |
43.2 |
| Television |
20.6 |
| Radio |
16.8 |
| Other people |
15.4 |
| Other/don't
know |
2.6 |
| Internet |
1.0 |
| Magazines |
0.4 |
NOTE: Television ranked
higher as a source of news about the world (35.6 percent called it their main
source, compared to 24.8 for newspapers). TV was in a virtual tie with
newspapers as the leading source of news about the state (32.8 for TV vs. 33.4
for newspapers). But for local news, as Table 1 shows, twice as many people in
our sample turned to newspapers as television. (REMINDER: Only people who said
they watch local TV no more than three days per week, or less often than they
did a few years ago, were questioned for this survey.)
TABLE 2
Q: About how many days a week would you say you use each of the following
sources for news?
| NEWS SOURCE |
MEAN # DAYS PER
WEEK |
| Conversations with other
people |
4.02 |
| Local radio
stations |
3.97 |
| Local
newspapers |
3.31 |
| The Weather Channel
|
2.32 |
| Broadcast network
news (eg ABC, CBS, NBC) |
2.17 |
| LOCAL TV NEWS |
1.84 |
| National cable networks (eg
CNN, MSNBC) |
1.82 |
| Internet |
1.78 |
| Local cable
channels |
1.65 |
| ESPN, Fox Sports or
CNN/SI |
1.56 |
| National newspapers (NYT,
USA Today, WSJ) |
0.82 |
TABLE 3
Q: I'm going to read
a list of reasons that others have mentioned for not watching the local TV news.
What I'd like you to do is tell me how much each reason applies to you. We'll
use a scale from zero to ten, where zero means the reason doesn't apply at all
to you and ten means the reason applies a great deal to you.
| REASON FOR NOT
WATCHING LOCAL TV NEWS |
Mean score on a
scale of 0-10 |
Percent saying
8, 9 or 10 |
| You get local
news elsewhere |
5.33 |
35.2 |
| You are too
busy to watch when home |
5.33 |
34.4 |
| You are not
home when the news comes on |
5.26 |
38.6 |
| There is too
much crime on local TV news |
4.79 |
32.0 |
| The news seldom
presents positive things |
4.52 |
24.4 |
| Local news is
always the same stuff |
4.51 |
25.0 |
| There are too
many fluff stories |
4.49 |
24.6 |
| You are asleep
when the late news comes on |
4.47 |
36.6 |
| You are
watching something else when the news is on |
4.28 |
27.0 |
| The local news
is too negative |
4.22 |
22.8 |
| Local news is
boring |
4.18 |
19.6 |
| The news
doesn't offer enough details |
3.89 |
18.6 |
| The news
doesn't relate to your life |
3.61 |
19.6 |
| You don't like
the way they present the news |
3.61 |
16.8 |
| Newscasters
don't always get their facts straight |
3.46 |
14.4 |
| You don't care
that much about local news |
3.40 |
17.0 |
| The promos for
the news turn you off |
3.31 |
15.6 |
| The news
doesn't live up to the promos |
3.18 |
11.0 |
| The stations
don't give much local news |
3.10 |
12.2 |
| There is too
much sports |
3.09 |
14.0 |
| You don't like
the way it covers people like you |
3.07 |
19.0 |
| Local news just
isn't important to you |
2.98 |
13.8 |
| Newscasters
don't know what they are talking about |
2.94 |
10.4 |
| Newscasters
spend too much time talking to each other |
2.91 |
12.2 |
| There is too
much weather on local news |
2.47 |
9.0 |
| You work at
night and can't watch the news |
2.28 |
14.4 |
TABLE
4 Q. Now I'm going
to read a short list of topics that could be covered on the local TV news.
Please tell me if you would be MORE likely or LESS likely to watch the local
news if it offered more coverage of each topic. Would that be a lot (more/less)
likely or somewhat (more/less) likely?
| TOPIC |
A LOT
MORE |
SOMEWHAT
MORE |
SAME |
SOMEWHAT
LESS |
A LOT
LESS |
| Education issues, like testing, teacher training |
37.3 |
31.1 |
8.8 |
16.3 |
6.4 |
| Stories about
what's happening in the local schools |
37.1 |
35.1 |
7.8 |
13.8 |
6.2 |
| Health
reports |
33.7 |
36.9 |
8.4 |
13.0 |
8.0 |
| Community
events and happenings in the area |
33.0 |
43.3 |
5.2 |
12.7 |
5.8 |
| Local business
activities and jobs |
28.1 |
38.0 |
9.6 |
17.9 |
6.4 |
| Environmental
issues, like air pollution and clean water |
27.9 |
38.0 |
9.2 |
15.3 |
9.6 |
| Government
waste or fraud |
26.8 |
31.4 |
7.9 |
20.7 |
13.2 |
| Features about
interesting people |
24.5 |
38.1 |
9.3 |
17.6 |
10.5 |
| Consumer
reports |
24.0 |
42.7 |
9.1 |
14.7 |
9.5 |
| Personal
finance issues |
20.5 |
34.5 |
9.2 |
23.1 |
12.7 |
| State
government actions |
20.3 |
34.9 |
10.2 |
22.9 |
11.6 |
| City or local
government actions |
20.2 |
39.8 |
7.7 |
20.6 |
11.7 |
| Political
campaigns and elections |
12.3 |
19.3 |
12.5 |
25.3 |
30.4 |
| Fires |
9.7 |
22.9 |
13.4 |
34.1 |
19.9 |
| Accidents |
9.1 |
21.4 |
12.3 |
28.7 |
28.5 |
| Crimes |
8.3 |
21.3 |
12.3 |
26.9 |
31.2 |
TABLE 5
Demographic information in percentages, national sample (N=500)
| Gender |
Male |
47.8 |
| |
Female |
52.2 |
| Age |
18-29 |
28.0 |
| |
30-39 |
25.6 |
| |
40-49 |
21.4 |
| |
50-59 |
14.0 |
| |
60-69 |
6.6 |
| |
70+ |
2.6 |
| |
Refused |
1.8 |
| |
Mean |
40.3 |
| Education |
Less than high
school degree |
7.0 |
| |
High school
degree |
26.4 |
| |
Business/technical/vocational |
6.4 |
| |
Some
college |
24.8 |
| |
College
degree(s) |
34.6 |
| |
DK/refused |
0.2 |
| Race |
White |
79.0 |
| |
Black |
10.2 |
| |
Hispanic |
2.2 |
| |
Other |
6.8 |
| |
DK/refused |
1.8 |
| Household
income |
Less than
$25,000 |
15.4 |
| |
$25,000-$39,000 |
19.8 |
| |
$40,000-$59,000 |
18.6 |
| |
At least
$60,000 |
32.6 |
| |
DK/refused |
13.6 |
| Work for
pay |
No |
17.8 |
| |
Yes |
82.2 |
| Of those who
work for pay |
Full
time |
81.6 |
| |
Part
time |
18.3 |

|