Mainstream media

[Johnny Dangerously]

What is it? What isn't it?

What's your dividing line? I wonder if it's a generational thing, because I saw someone refer to a website as being mainstream media, and it occurred to me that I would have never referred to the site as "mainstream media." I'll hold back its identity for now because I'd like to see what parameters people have for the category, kind of like those sport/not a sport lists/polls we've all seen.

Apologies if this has already been done.

 

[DanOregon]

I've always wondered why the right uses it a pejorative. I've always figured any outlet that avails itself to all facts and includes various viewpoints in compiling its news report qualifies as mainstream media. Those that don't would be considered "alternative media." The left's pejorative of choice is the "corporate media."
CNN, NYT, Wash. Post, WSJ, AP and the broadcast networks (and Fox News's news division) would be MSM to me. Original reporting is the key, with primary sources and documentation. Also I think intended audience is key - MSM attempts to reach and service the widest possible audience, which may influence their coverage.

 

[SpeedTchr]

In my experience, the "mainstream media" is those outlets who put out news and views you don't agree with.

 

[MisterCreosote]

In my experience, the "mainstream media" is those outlets who put out news and views you don't agree with.

Exactly.

When I was in the business, I figured I must've been doing something right if both sides hated me equally.

 

[I Should Coco]

Good question, J.D. In my neck of the woods, the "alternative weekly" newspaper is kicking the daily newspaper's ass on print media advertising, because people younger than 65 actually read the alt-weekly. They also do a fairly decent job of analysis and in-depth reporting on local news; it's not all look-at-me columns or entertainment schedules.

So I suppose I would include well-established, quality alt-weeklies as mainstream media these days.

 

[DanOregon]

Found an interesting definition of alternative media - media that focuses on those groups and/or stories that are not typically covered by mainstream media outlets. Sounds about right.

 

[Bronco77]

Agree it's a very good question. Down here there's an excellent digital-only outfit that focuses on investigative and watchdog journalism, doing the sorts of stories the newspapers regularly did before resources started dwindling. The editor (who'd been involved with some Pulitzer-winning projects at the Miami Herald) and reporters all used to work for "mainstream" newspapers and produce "mainstream" stories. Readership is still small but growing. And there's no political bias to speak of. I guess whether this organization is "mainstream" or not depends on your definition.

 

[Doc Holliday]

I've always viewed mainstream media as the preferred media of choice for the general public. Thus, I've always seen television as mainstream. It's all in what your definition of mainstream is.

 

[Johnny Dangerously]

I agree that it's all in what your definition of mainstream is, which is why I asked how people here define it, their dividing line between mainstream and not. I'm curious to see different people's definitions of it. Interesting perspectives so far. Thanks.

 

[wicked]

"Mainstream media" at this point is anything that isn't hatchet journalism focused on pushing one narrative.

Breitbart can win 10 Pulitzers and it'll never be considered mainstream.

 

[BTExpress]

In my neck of the woods, the "alternative weekly" newspaper is kicking the daily newspaper's ass on print media advertising, because people younger than 65 actually read the alt-weekly.

Kicking the daily paper's ass on number of ads? Column inches? Revenue?

Since one publishes every day and the other once a week, I expect the weekly to have a more robust ad "feel" to it. Just not sure how it compares if you combine all seven days of the daily.

 

[I Should Coco]

Kicking the daily paper's ass on number of ads? Column inches? Revenue?

Since one publishes every day and the other once a week, I expect the weekly to have a more robust ad "feel" to it. Just not sure how it compares if you combine all seven days of the daily.

I'm going with my eyeballs on number of ads. I understand your point — ads in the daily are (in theory*) spread out seven days a week — but I notice quite a few local restaurants, shops, etc. who used to be in our paper are now in the weekly.
And I'm not privy to revenue numbers.

* — let's face it, most of the daily paper ads, just about anywhere in the country, appear in the Wednesday and Sunday editions.

 

[Vombatus]

There are some charts out there that slightly touch upon this subject (not exactly the MSM question).

 

[Vombatus]

Then this one, which thankfully describes their methodology:

 

[DanOregon]

I'm not usually one who sticks up for Fox News - but their reporters are fine. Unfortunately, what news managers decide to cover/not cover and what the talking heads say completely overshadows their usually solid reporting. Interesting seeing The Hill go from upper right to lower left in the two diagrams.

 

[Vombatus]

Here's another:

 

[Vombatus]

I'm not usually one who sticks up for Fox News - but their reporters are fine. Unfortunately, what news managers decide to cover/not cover and what the talking heads say completely overshadows their usually solid reporting. Interesting seeing The Hill go from upper right to lower left in the two diagrams.

There's more of these diagrams than you can shake a stick at.

 

[Vombatus]

And, then there's this. Disgusting.

 

[QYFW]

Gabriel is a good follow.

 

[Alma]

Fox News is a part of it.

If your network is hosting presidential debates, you're mainstream, period.