For the final draft of our game, Newsroom Sensation, we made a few changes. First, since we had more time, we made it a bit nicer to look at - we added a background image (credit below), as well as changed some of the colors to better contrast with the theme color. More substantial changes we made had to do with content. We edited the Mr. S scenarios to include headlines that players can choose whether or not to publish. We also modified the beginning instructions by splitting them into two slides to make them a bit clearer. The point system remained the same, but we played around with the gains and losses throughout the scenarios to make them more consistent (for the most part, a point change will only occur once an article is published). If we had more time, we probably could have made this game a bit more visually pleasing or paid more attention to graphics. It's definitely not ugly as it stands right now, but with more time we may have been able to reorganize things in such away that would allow us to include more images. We also would have used a different program to allow us to make the point system automatic. But as it stands, doing so would take a truly disgusting amount of time-consuming work, as well as a huge transfer of data from slides to a new tool, so we decided to forego it. We learned a lot while making this game. Individually, we had an idea of what sensationalism is, but the research we put into creating this game gave that understanding more depth. We learned strategies for better identifying it in headlines, as well as the different kinds of sensationalism and the methods of using it. We also learned about the motivations behind it, which were surprisingly not all monetary - as you can tell from a scenario in the game, sometimes there are nobler or at least slightly less deceptive motivations behind it. Finally, we looked a lot into how opting for or against sensationalism can impact an organization, and we learned of all the ways such things could be tackled. A lot of work went into this game in terms of research and execution, so we hope you'll have fun playing it! Click here to try it out! Links to Previous Posts: The Process of CreationDigital Narrative Games: Reflection Digital Narrative Game Phase 2: Research Digital Narrative Game Phase 3: Prototype Scenarios Digital Narrative Game Phase 4: First Draft Credits and Links to SourcesBackground image for the game:
"Newspapers B&W (5)" by NS Newsflash is licensed under CC BY 2.0, https://search.creativecommons.org/photos/22824b31-dcb2-42e7-9301-0b15ec9e8039 Links to articles: https://theconversation.com/aiming-for-novelty-in-coronavirus-coverage-journalists-end-up-sensationalizing-the-trivial-and-untrue-138506 https://examples.yourdictionary.com/brilliant-clickbait-examples-and-why-they-work.html https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1178220.shtml https://hbr.org/2017/01/the-u-s-medias-problems-are-much-bigger-than-fake-news-and-filter-bubbles https://www.cbsnews.com/news/porn-model-murder-the-secret-life-of-zoey-zane/ Scholarly Sources: Garrett, L. (2020). COVID-19: the medium is the message. The lancet, 395(10228), 942-943. Lowe, L. (2016). Crying wolf: An analysis of the use of sensational content within the media and the desensitizing effects it has on audiences. Scacco, Joshua and Muddiman, Ashley. (2015, December). The Current State of News Headlines. Center for Media Engagement. https://mediaengagement.org/research/the-current-state-of-news-headlines/
0 Comments
This game is being designed by Heidi Aref and Mazen Hassan Integrity vs PopularityWe’d have a system of integrity and popularity "points." Truthfulness in a headline earns integrity, while attention-grabbing features earn popularity. Too little integrity will result in your paper getting marked as a kind of unreliable tabloid. Too little popularity will end up shutting your paper down because you don’t have enough readers. Scenario 1: The Harm of SensationalismYou’re a new journalist who’s landed a job at XX News. Your first assignment is to write a story for the health and lifestyle section. You type up an article about foods nutritionists claim will help boost your immune system, including suggestions about what is speculated to help during the pandemic. You also find a detail that seems to suggest that some of the recommended foods are becoming more popular in supermarkets. Now, all that’s left is to give it a headline before sending it to an editor. You jot down a few ideas before settling on...
Choosing 1 will earn you integrity points, but won’t generate very much popularity Choosing 2 will earn both integrity and decent popularity Choosing 3 will earn you a good deal of popularity, but not very much integrity Scenario 1.5: We could also include further consequence choices, such as “If you choose B, your copy editor calls you to the desk asking if you think a more exciting title would be better for this article.” You...
The Takeaway: The pandemic is already sensationalized enough in the news and exaggerated by multiple parties. The media doesn’t need to contribute further to the already-present anxiety surrounding it. But you can still find articles like “What to eat to help protect yourself from coronavirus: Nutrition experts reveal the foods and spices that boost your immunity and health FAST” in the news today. Such headlines are not only sensationalized; they’re misleading. Although the temptation to use an exciting headline is great, it can harm the greater community. According to L. Garret, “the difficulty in sifting fact from inaccurate information is aggravated by the speed of unfolding events, how much is still to be researched and understood by scientists and clinicians about COVID-19, alongside earlier deliberate obfuscation by some governments.” Especially with such a serious and constantly-evolving issue as this pandemic, it’s important for headlines not to further contribute to the miscommunication of information. Scenario 2: Identifying SensationalismToday you’ve been assigned to work as an assistant at the Copy desk. This is where articles go before editing and publishing. You will be reviewing potential headlines before going forward. Determine whether the following are appropriate for publishing or too sensationalized to make the cut. Shocking video of sisters dropped over border wall fuels criticism of Biden immigration policy (Misleading; Fox news; 3/4/2021) While it is Biden who is currently in charge, the policies that are in place are all remnants of Trump's immigration policy. By labeling it as Biden's immigration policy (since its Biden who is currently in charge) it shifts focus from the fact that it was Trump who built up the system in the first place, and thus it is misleading Where is Kamala? Not at the southern border; Lara Trump reacts (Capitalizing on irrelevant detail; Fox news; 4/4/2021) The managing of the border crisis with Mexico has been tasked to Kamala Haris. This article focuses on the fact that it has been 10 days since the last press conference she gave regarding the issue, and has not been to the border in the week after being assigned the issue. By choosing to focus on the days it's been since she has spoken on the issue, it makes it seem as if she has completely abandoned the issue (for all of 1 week where she has not mentioned it). The headline focuses on the fact that she has not gone to the border, and spins it in order to shift opinion Test Results of Minnesota Protestors Show this Many CoronaVirus Positives (Clickbait; June 15) It's another Fox news article. The headline of the link before you click it reads as is written up top, but once you click it it changes to Early test results of Minnesota protesters show few coronavirus positives. This initially creates an idea in the reader's head that the BLM protests in Minnesota caused a new super-spreading event, when in reality once you click on the article it actually did not cause that many new positives Tucker Carlson: US military has gone full woke, waging war on those who disagree with them (Fear Mongering; March 27) Now this article would have you believe that the US military has started taking actions against people who don't agree with the military and its actions. Almost as if to imply that the military is taking over the country and taking away free speech. Not really the case though. The military hired a Chief of Diversity & Inclusion whose job would be to make sure that minorities in the military are adequately represented more or less. There is no war on those who disagree with the military 'There is no God but Allah'? School accused of Islamic indoctrination (Misleading) This article is misleading, as it creates a separation between God and “Allah” in the headline. However “Allah” is the translation of God in Arabic, and its the same deity across both religions. By phrasing them as 2 different deities, the article becomes misleading Scenario 3: Bank or BustIn the event of low popularity and high integrity... Your paper’s readership isn’t doing well. That is, until when the next issue garners a notable amount of attention. It comes from one story titled “Corona air bound? A nightmare that could happen.” Surprised, you read through the article, and realize that the ‘nightmare’ in question is actually a highly unlikely mutation speculated upon by the World Health Organization. This is undoubtedly a sensationalized headline. Regardless, the popularity it garnered is undeniable - and you aren’t the only one to notice this. Editors begin to approach you with more dramatic headlines for their articles. None are on the same level as the initial title, but they are definitely each embellished. This time, publishing such titles would be no editor’s mistake; it would be deliberate sensationalism. But, there’s no denying it might be able to save your paper’s readership. In the end, you decide to...
Choosing 1 will earn you integrity points, but your popularity will fall, thus causing your paper to shut down. You can sleep easy at night knowing you made the morally correct decision, but whether the result was really worth it is up to you. Choosing 2 will boost your popularity, but your integrity takes a hit. More people are reading your articles for sure, but definitely at the cost of your original audience’s trust and loyalty. The Takeaway: While sensationalism can be the result of poor editing or the speed at which an article must be put out, it is not always something done unintentionally. In fact, much of the attention-grabbing titles are carefully worded so that they can be both sensational and technically true. A big issue with the practice lies in the fact that it is rewarded. Bharat Anand comments, “The media did exactly what it was designed to do, given the incentives that govern it. It’s not that the media sets out to be sensationalist; its business model leads it in that direction.” This issue in its actuality is fundamental; it’s built into the framework of the media as a way to profit. This, in addition to the fact that it’s clever in its portrayal of the “truth,” makes sensationalism a practice unlikely to end soon. So, it’s important to be aware and attentive of it, and develop media literacy so as not to fall into its trap. Scenario 4: Sensationalism for a Cause?Today, you’re working as an editor in the newsroom. An article lands at your desk, and you’re tasked with giving it a headline. The story covers a shooting at a local school. Many were injured, but thankfully no one died, even though many easily could have. You are of the opinion that far too many of these incidents have been occurring. It’s honestly getting ridiculous, but it’s becoming so common that you wonder whether people are becoming desensitized to it. You sigh and set to titling the articles, but then you come to a realization. As a trusted editor, you could probably headline your article however you like with little resistance...
Choosing 1 will increase popularity and minimally impact integrity. You garner a bit of attention for your cause, but as a respected editor, has your use of exaggeration set a dangerous precedent? Choosing 2 will not impact popularity but will increase integrity. Your choice to remain objective in a sea of articles that have jumped on the bandwagon of panic and have pushed their stance on gun control is respectable and has earned the respect of your audience. The Takeaway: As with all things, sensationalism isn’t viewed as completely detestable or completely commendable. While often resulting in negative consequences, it’s important to consider nobler motives behind its use. According to William B. Frye, “Altheide’s study shows the media have the ability to influence what the readers think. According to Altheide, if the news media reports on a topic, such as Columbine as Altheide writes, and associate that topic with fear in every story, then it could be argued that the constant coverage would eventually lead the audience to feel scared or panicky every time they think of the topic at hand. But, that kind of fear may eventually lead to a social change that would be better for the world, Altheide argues.” Although more often than not, sensationalism is used for profit, it is important to consider how it could be utilized in a better way (such as raising awareness for worthy causes). Scenario 5: Integrity vs OpportunityIn the event of low integrity and good popularity...
The paper has finally started to get back on its feet after a slow few weeks. You’ve had to publish some articles that are a bit less objective than you were initially comfortable with, but your readership is on the rise. The paper is stable. You come to work to find the newsroom in a frenzy - they’ve got a scoop for a globally-followed running story, and the information is yet to become public knowledge. An article is written up and the editors are tasked with giving it a headline. Time is of the essence! But you have a problem. Will you…
Choosing 1 really will boost your popularity, but your integrity will take a hit. Your choice to sensationalize, while profitable, has lessened your credibility - especially because you sensationalized such a serious topic. Choosing 2 will still boost your popularity while also increasing your integrity. The addition to the running story really was substantial enough to let the article stand on its own without any bells or whistles. The Takeaway: As was previously stated, the business model for the media truly does reward sensationalism with its exciting and dramatic titles. So, it follows that even stable news agencies would seek to increase their ratings by taking up the practice whenever they’re able. The topic of sensationalism is especially relevant to running stories (like COVID-19 right now) because it is even more prone to misleading audiences than in regular coverage. Taking the example of COVID again, we’re always getting the most up-to-date information regarding safety measures, so it’s important that when such news does come out, it comes out clearly. Speed also factors into this, because oftentimes news agencies will publish first and make corrections later in order to catch the first readers. This, too, is rewarded by the system, even if it causes more chaos in the relay of information - doubly so when sensationalism is involved. The Basic IdeaWe decided to do our digital narrative game on sensationalism in the news, specifically in headlines. The general idea is to create a game to bring attention to exaggerated headlines, especially those related to COVID-19 and similarly popular news topics, and to show the negative effects that they can have on greater audiences. Sensationalism: Definition, Motivation, and EffectsAccording to the Oxford Languages Dictionary, sensationalism is "the presentation of stories in a way that is intended to provoke public interest or excitement, at the expense of accuracy." As such, it makes sense why companies or networks would opt for it; most of the time (unfortunately) news is not so much about information as it is about getting users to click on the article so they may be taken to their website. It's very profit-driven, and when the general motto is "publish first, verify later," you can bet a lot of exaggeration falls through the cracks. One might think that hyperbole is not nearly so detrimental as I might make it out to be, but I assure you this is wrong. Consider this: some media professional wants to publish some news about the pandemic. But the density of COVID news right now (and for the past year for that matter) makes such an article negligible, just another title in the crowd. So, how to make it stand out? Well, with an attention grabbing headline, of course! And herein lies the problem: depending on what the professional decides to emphasize in their headline, potential audiences can be terribly misled. Take what Scacco and Muddiman (2015) have to say about this in the context of trials: "Headlines can, for instance, influence how news readers think about a whether a suspect is guilty of a crime. An early study of news headlines conducted by Percy H. Tannenbaum found that headlines suggesting that a person on trial was guilty led people who read a news story to think that person was guilty. A headline suggesting that a person was innocent led people who read the exact same news story to think that the person was innocent. In other words, changing only the headline led news readers to reach different conclusions about a person’s guilt or innocence." As can be gathered from this passage, a headline can easily sway - and so easily mislead - an audience. And this is precisely what we wish to bring attention to with our game. Another dangerous aspect of sensationalism lies on the other side of the spectrum of people's responses to news. While some might react strongly to every new COVID headline, for example, others may become desensitized by the sensationalism. If an alarm bell is constantly, constantly ringing to alert us to something, eventually it will fade into background noise. It may even become exhausting to follow especially because of the over-the-top sensationalism, thus resulting in pandemic fatigue, which could lead to general apathy towards the situation. This, in turn, is also bad because it means that when significant news does actually come in to play, people will not be able to pay attention to it as much as they should. Headline ExamplesWe found some relevant examples of exaggerated headlines, courtesy of YourDictionary.com From Mother Jones, an article titled The Scary New Science That Shows Milk Is Bad For You, which ultimately "talks about how adults don't need as much calcium as previously suggested" From CNN, the headline Ebola in the Air? A Nightmare That Could Happen, which leads to an article that explains how "the World Health Organization actually says that type of virus mutation is highly unlikely and is only speculation" From Bloomberg, the alarming cover page Ebola is Coming, which resultingly "greatly exaggerated what was a very real threat without having to be sensationalized" Other Relevant Quotes and SourcesQuotes:
“...Those debates have fuelled media reporting, even when the evidence is still uncertain and research is ongoing.” (Garret 2020) “The difficulty in sifting fact from inaccurate information is aggravated by the speed of unfolding events, how much is still to be researched and understood by scientists and clinicians about COVID-19, alongside earlier deliberate obfuscation by some governments.” (Garret 2020) Other Links: https://theconversation.com/aiming-for-novelty-in-coronavirus-coverage-journalists-end-up-sensationalizing-the-trivial-and-untrue-138506 https://examples.yourdictionary.com/brilliant-clickbait-examples-and-why-they-work.html https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1178220.shtml Scholarly Sources: Garrett, L. (2020). COVID-19: the medium is the message. The lancet, 395(10228), 942-943. Lowe, L. (2016). Crying wolf: An analysis of the use of sensational content within the media and the desensitizing effects it has on audiences. Scacco, Joshua and Muddiman, Ashley. (2015, December). The Current State of News Headlines. Center for Media Engagement. https://mediaengagement.org/research/the-current-state-of-news-headlines/ We were tasked with playing 6 total digital narrative games. The ones I ended up choosing besides Spent and BBC Syrian Refugees were Factitious, Responsible Partying, Domestic Violence in Egypt, and A Mother's Dilemma. Spent
All these games had certain features in common and other features that made them unique, so I think it would be interesting to reflect on them by comparing them in terms of how educational they are vs how efficiently they mess with the player emotionally.
In my opinion, the games that were the most informative were probably Spent and Domestic Violence in Egypt. Each of them had an abundance of facts - after practically every choice made, information was offered to let you know if the action you just committed to was wise or unadvisable. Both games used the choices you made to inform you about the consequences and/or related facts, which really helps if you don't know the specifics of financial struggles or being with an abuser. A Mother's dilemma also did this quite well, and I personally really liked having more information about the possible steps you can take when a kid is getting bullied. Do you intervene at the risk of making it worse for the kid? If you intervene will it be with the school or the bully's parents? These questions are answered with reasons as to why each decision in the options given would be best. Next in terms of educational value would be the Syrian Refugee game and Responsible partying. While both did have facts and statistics in their narratives, I don't think they stood out as strongly as in the other games. And somehow Factitious turns up last. Not that it wasn't entertaining and objectively informative in the headlines it provides, it's just that the information provided regarding identifying fake news was relatively brief. In terms of emotional impact, which I feel is also important to making sure a game "sticks" with you, I think I'll tie Syrian Refugees and A Mother's Dilemma. Like I said before playing the former game was just very upsetting. It makes me sad to think that people have to go through so much in order to live safely and that even those efforts are countered by media narratives against refugees. Truly, it's tragic. A Mother's Dilemma serves to make me similarly upset and angry because it reminds me of how easily harassment and bullying can be overlooked, excused, or dismissed at schools. Being put in the place of the mother was also a swift kick to the heart. Next up would be Spent and the Domestic Violence game. Again, it's the subject matter that gets me here - in both games the frustration with the situation is really played upon. While Spent tests your patience by throwing every conceivable unfavorable situation in your financially-strained face, the other game tries it by showing what people think they can get away with in a relationship. And it's even worse in this setting! Finally, the least emotionally impactful games were Responsible Partying and Factitious. I don't think either intended to have much of an emotional impact, but as a result they were each less memorable for me. The only non-information based criteria they offered was a story and the satisfaction of choosing correctly, but (likely due to the subject matter) they lacked an emotional hook. |