Consider for a moment if you will, an apparently simple and perhaps routine observation, as that which is offered by researcher Sonia Livingstone: 'all day, every day, people create and recreate meanings in their everyday lives'. Such activity it would seem, depends little on whether these people are working, judging the weather, having a conversation, or indeed, watching television; for as Livingstone suggests, 'people routinely and apparently unproblematically make sense of their circumstances'. It is only when pondered further that this activity of meaning making or 'sense making' is seen for what it really is - 'far from unproblematic' (Livingstone 1990:3). Furthermore, while everyday interactions have often mistakenly been seen to be routine, it may come as no surprise that the act of watching television suffers from a similar misapprehension. As Livingstone has noted, watching television or 'mediated communication', has increasingly come to be recognized as a complex, rule-governed, constructive process, rather than an 'unproblematic, passive process, where the meanings of programmes are seen as given and obvious'. Thus, people's role in such communication can no longer be underestimated; they too must, as Livingstone maintains, 'be correspondingly understood as knowledgeable, skilled, motivated and diverse' (Livingstone 1990:3).
Hence it is this complex interpretative, or sense making process, that will be the focus of this essay. In particular it will concentrate on the responses of viewers of the same live news broadcast, considering how they might differ in making sense of the same items, and why.
In order to help facilitate the understanding of viewers' interpretations it is necessary, as Livingstone would suggest, to consider various questions and issues. For example; 'what do viewers find salient, how are they selective, how do they integrate4new' programme information with 'old' social knowledge, how do they differentiate among messages, and how perceptive are they of underlying messages' (Livingstone 1990:24). However, it is the primary concern of this essay to consider not only those issues mentioned, but to concentrate on what the respondents actually remembered of the programme watched; paying particular attention to what was left out in their recount, and the underlying reasons behind this. In doing so it will look at various other factors that may have influenced the respondents replies; including the respondents preferred style of viewing, familiarity with the genre, level of interest, and comprehension.
In an attempt to elucidate further on this complex area of study, this essay will refer to several research studies that have been undertaken on a similar basis; in particular the research of Justin Lewis and Doris Graber, both of whom focus strongly on interpretation and making sense of the news. In addition it will also look at work carried out by Sonia Livingstone on the act of interpretation and factors affecting this process.
This study has been conducted primarily through the use of in-depth interviews and observations. Individual interviews were undertaken two hours after watching the news broadcast and tape-recorded. This ensured I had a precise record of viewers responses which could be referred to throughout the study, and the subsequent analysis. This helped to avoid any confusion or misrepresentation that might have occurred, had I been forced to rely on my own recollections and interpretations of the participants responses. The time period chosen for the interviews, was an attempt to minimize the likelihood of any additional knowledge being gained from later news broadcasts. In addition it was felt that individual interviews would allow the participants to concentrate on their own recount and interpretations, without being unduly influenced by those given by the other participants.
The news broadcast central to this study was chosen at random (although at a pre-arranged time), with both myself and the participants having little, or no prior knowledge of what would be covered. This, it was hoped, would ensure that each person would come to the study with more or less the same level of understanding and knowledge of what was to be watched. I was aware, however, that for those participants with a keen interest in the 'news', there may have been some prior knowledge gained from news broadcasts or newspapers viewed earlier in the day, which may have had an effect on the responses given.
The participants involved in the study are members of my own student household, with one exception (although this person is a regular visitor to the household), this I hoped would help to create a more relaxed atmosphere, thus resulting in my own role as researcher and interviewer being perceived as less intrusive. In addition it may have helped to offset any awkwardness or unease associated with the act of being tape-recorded. Perhaps most importantly, however, I was particularly conscious of the effect the actual research conditions may have had on the participants viewing, recount, and subsequent interpretations. For as Justin Lewis points out, 'people do not normally watch or talk about television in research conditions' (Lewis 1991:73). However, it was hoped that by taking this into account, and by being aware of the participants preferred style of viewing, this problem would to some degree be overcome, or at least minimized. In addition, it must also be considered, that in this complex area of interpretation and sense making, it may have been difficult for the participants to actually verbalize what they were thinking. As Lewis points out:
Consequently it would appear, there is often a gap between what people think, and what they actually tell us about those thoughts.
It was hoped that by taking these various considerations into account, and by encouraging free flowing conversation with the participants, about their thoughts and interpretations, some of these disadvantages may have been overcome. However, they must be considered in light of any of the findings that may arise throughout the course of this study.
Participants' Backgrounds
The study involved four students, both male and female, ranging in age from 21 to 35. I felt it was important to establish the participants' backgrounds as far as it related to their news' interests, habits, and preferred style of viewing; as this may have had an effect on their responses.
Both males (M35 and M33) have a strong, long-standing interest in the news, and news related programmes. Both read the newspaper regularly with M35 also referring to 'interact newspapers'. Television news is the main source of news for both males, who will watch a number of broadcasts throughout the day; supplementing further with updates on Teletext. In addition, M35 will follow up stories in newspapers the next day and on other news related programmes such as Newsnight and Panorama. The BBC 6pm broadcast was favoured by all participants who saw it as being the most current, up-to- date, and the most important source of news. Both M33 and F21 (female 21) declared it to be more authoritative, more informed, and more in-depth, especially when compared to ITV news. However, the overall deciding factor for all participants, on the BBC as the preferred news, was its long broadcasting tradition and the tradition of watching it with their families within the home.
Similarly, F21 professed a keen interest in the news, one which has developed in its importance over recent years. This she saw as a direct result of a growing demand on her to make more informed decisions, relating to various 'news worthy' issues. Hence she admitted a strong reliance on the news to assist her in this; "because it (the news) influences you more... it helps you decide what side of the argument you will be on, what to think about things... it helps you to make up your mind quickly about things... like strikes".
Female 26 (F26), on the other hand, was notably different from the other participants, in that she has little or no real interest in the news. She occasionally reads the newspaper, but would pay only a cursory glance at the television news if it happened to be on. She finds it particularly difficult to sit through a half hour news broadcast, preferring instead 6radio news' which gives what she describes as "quick and concise news". However, like the other participants the BBC was favoured for the news; because of the tradition of watching it with her family.
The participants' preferred style of viewing is particularly significant to this study, for as David Morley points out; there is often a marked distinction between the preferred style of viewing for both men and women. He found that men tend to have a preference for 4viewing attentively, in silence, without interruption' so as not to miss anything. Women on the other hand appear to regard watching television as a 'social activity, involving ongoing conversation' often done in conjunction with another activity (Morley 1986: 150); observations which do appear to be reflected by the participants in the study.
Both males stated firmly that they preferred to watch the news on their own, without interruption, thus they both had reservations about watching the news broadcast in a group situation. This was also true for F26 who has a preference for viewing in silence and without interruption, although this is more evident when the programme is of particular interest to her (which the news was not). F21 on the other hand prefers to watch television with others. She commented that she liked to talk during programmes and during the news in particular, as this not only helps her to make sense of what is going on, but helps to clear up any misunderstandings she may have about the programmes content.
The study was based upon a transmission of the primetime BBC news programme broadcast at 6pm. As stated earlier, the particular broadcast was random with only the time slot prearranged. I did however video record the programme to allow me to refer to it during my analysis of the participants' responses. The programme consisted of one major domestic story, two other substantial stories (one domestic political story and one foreign), three medium length stories, three shorter stories and several news snippets. This broadcast was notable in that it didn't appear to have any significant 'new' stories, and contained rather a lot of human interest stories, which may not be 'typical' of what is expected of the news.
The analysis of this broadcast does not concentrate on any particular news items, but rather focuses on those which were significant to, or ignored by, the participants; along with those that generated a variation in interpretation. A brief transcription of the news items follows, in the order they appeared; with more detail being discussed where differences emerged in the participants' interpretations, further on in the essay.
STEWART: The Prime Minister has urged people to back the Millennium Dome to prove Britain is a place for daring and boldness. Tony Blair unveiled models of what's going to be inside the dome to allay some of the controversy surrounding the project. He also announced that almost half the sponsorship needed to fund the project was already in the bank.
STEWART: The UN Secretary General Koffi Annan is at the Security Council in New York explaining his deal with Saddam Hussein, and Mr. Annan has said he is confident it will be acceptable. The proposals include the formation of a special team of UN weapons inspectors and diplomats to search Iraq's presidential sights. Tony Blair said Saddam must be told that any further obstruction of the inspections will be followed by severe consequences.
STEWART: A Somali man hanged for murder in Cardiff forty six years ago has had his conviction quashed by the Court of Appeal. (Family suggested he was a victim of institutionalized racism).
LEWIS: The Sinn Fein leader - Gerry Adams - has been meeting the Irish Prime Minister to discuss his party's suspension form the multi-party peace talks. And an IRA source has told the BBC that it was not involved in the two latest car bomb explosions. and it does not help other armed groups.
STEWART: A man who helped plan three IRA mortar bomb attacks on Heathrow airport has been jailed for twenty years.
LEWIS: Drugs giants 'GlaxoWellcome' and 'Smithkline Beecham' have called off their 100 billion pound merger. (arguments over who would get the top jobs).
STEWART: Argument over whether Sean Connery should be given a Knighthood has taken a new turn. Mr. Connery said he thought he had missed out on the honour because of his support for the Scottish Nationalist Party.
Elton John has received his Knighthood from the Queen despite being called Sir John Elton by the - Lord Chamberlain at the ceremony.
Brian Little has resigned as manager of Aston Villa.
Cricket's founding body Marylebone Cricket Club, the MCC, is meeting to decide whether to end its two hundred and eleven years of male domination and admit women as members.
STEWART: The story of John Capes who made what may believe was the greatest escape from a submarine, has finally been confirmed after fifty seven years.
The participants are numbered according to when they were interviewed, along with their accounts which are listed in the order they were given.
| M35 | M33
| Princess Margaret | Princess Margaret
| Millennium Dome | Millennium Dome
| Koffi Annan | Koffi Annan
| Somali man murder conviction | Drugs Company merger quashed
| Gerry Adams/IRA source denial | Submarine escape
| Sean Connery | Somali man murder conviction quashed
| Elton John | Sean Connery
| Submarine escape | Elton John
| Marylebone Cricket Club vote | Brian Little's resignation
| Brian Little's resignation
| Missed | Missed
| IRA bomber jailed | Gerry Adams/IRA source denial
| Drugs Company Merger | IRA bomber jailed
| Marylebone Cricket Club vote
|
| F26 | F21
| Princess Margaret | Princess Margaret
| Koffi Annan | Millennium Dome
| Submarine escape | Koffi Annan
| Millennium Dome | Somali man murder conviction quashed
| Elton John | Gerry Adams/IRA source denial
| Gerry Adams/IRA source denial | Submarine escape
| IRA bomber jailed | Drugs company merger
| Somali man murder conviction quashed | Marylebone Cricket Club vote
| Marylebone Cricket Club vote
| Drugs Company merger
| Missed | Missed
| Sean Connery | IRA bomber jailed
| Brian Little's resignation | Brian Little's resignation
| Sean Connery
| Elton John
| |
What was significant about the participants' accounts was that the order in which the items were recalled was not necessarily representative of their significance for the participant, nor the amount, or accuracy, of detail that was remembered. This was particularly evident where two of the main stories were concerned - Princess Margaret and The Millennium Dome. While all the participants recalled these items in quite some detail, each stressed that they were not what they considered to be "newsworthy" stories, and therefore of little importance. Furthermore, each of the participants complained about how boring and uninteresting these items were, yet not only did they each recall them at the beginning (or towards the beginning) of their recount, but with a good deal of accuracy. This may of course, simply be a reflection of the order in which the items actually appeared in the broadcast. Alternatively, it could have been an attempt on behalf of the participants to recall the items in a linear fashion, thus providing a fuller and more accurate recount in the interviews which would follow.
Doris Graber reports, from her own research findings, that the main reasons most often cited by participants, for paying attention to news stories, were 'personal relevance, emotional appeal and an interesting story' (Graber), none of which were evident in the above mentioned examples. However, this is not to say that Graber's findings were not manifest in a number of other instances throughout this study. On the contrary, many of the accounts given in response to attention paid to news stories, were in fact consistent with these findings. For example, M35 commented that he was particularly drawn to the item on the Submarine escape because it related to his own Navy background, it was therefore not only what he considered to be an 'interesting story' but also of 'personal relevance' to him. This is reinforced further by Graber, who stresses that 'when people do pay attention to news, they process stories that seem interesting, simple to understand, and believable' (Graber 1988:107). Indeed these were found to be the deciding factors, for participants attention to news stories, throughout the course of this study.
An interesting example to further support this is found in the participants responses to the story - Somali man murder conviction quashed. Interviews with the participants suggest that this news item possessed a number of elements which guaranteed their attention; most notably 'emotional appeal' and an 'interesting story'. However, there was a variation in the reasons given for initial attention arousal in this instance. F21 stated that as she comes from near Cardiff herself, it was the mention of this story taking place in Cardiff, that first gained her attention. For the other participants, however. it was the actual theme of the story (injustice) that alerted their interest. Each participant stressed an emotional interest in this theme of injustice and a strong opposition to the death penalty, the result of which led them to feel that this story demanded more attention and 4empathy' from them.
But perhaps what was most significant in the participants’ accounts of this story was the amount of detail and accuracy in the overall recall of the item. Each participant remembered almost every detail of the story including the background information provided. When questioned further about why they remembered this particular story with such clarity, each participant commented on the fact that it was; "done more like a story... it seemed to flow". It would therefore appear that the narrative structure of this particular story played a key part in its recall by the participants. This is an issue which Justin Lewis comments on in his research; on the part narrative structure can play in aiding recall of the news. Lewis talks about the features of fictional narratives and codes which ‘structure and organize them into the shape of a story' (Lewis 1991:126). These he describes as the 'code of sequence' which refers to the way the story proceeds in a logical developing sequence, and the 'hermeneutic code' which begins with a 'question', followed by a presence of absence, and finally a resolution (Lewis 1991:126-7). It is these features, Lewis suggests, that attract and demand attention from 'viewers' thus aiding recall, yet it is these features which are, in most instances, missing from television news.
Rather, as Lewis explains, television news takes its structure from newspaper stories; beginning with the most important elements first, and then filling in the details in their order of 'newsworthiness' (Lewis 1991:130). On first glance there would seem to be little difference between this description and that of the news item on the Somali man. However, as stated by the participants, this item seemed to be more like a story. I would therefore suggest that a more fictional narrative structure was used, making use, in a sense, of the 'hermeneutic code'. For example, the item begins in much the same way as any other, with the anchor introducing the story. However, she does so in such a way as to leave the viewer with the question- 'what actually happened?'. Coverage then proceeds to give the history behind the story before bringing it to its resolution, with the conviction being quashed. Such an inference, however, is open to speculation; as the story itself was of 'emotional' interest to the participants, and therefore may have contributed to their overall level of recall and interpretation of the story's structure.
It is perhaps now pertinent to consider those further interpretative differences that arose during the course of this study. For this purpose two particular news items will be considered - Koffi Annan and the Gerry Adams/IRA source denial. The Koffi Annan story was significant in the sense that not only was it one of the main news items covered in the broadcast, but it was also the one which all the participants felt should have been the lead story. This view was particularly strong given the story's prominence in world and domestic news, throughout the weeks preceding this study. However, this issue aside, there were notable differences in the participants responses to this item, especially given how important they all felt it to be.
Both M35 and M33 recalled the item with a good deal of accuracy and understanding. As they both profess a keen interest in the news it was not surprising that they claimed a prior knowledge of this story. There was, therefore, little difference in interpretation, and little they failed to understand. As Graber suggests 'for most news stories the impact of prior information is profound. It affects the kinds of details that will be absorbed and the perspectives from which the story is viewed' (Graber 1988:136-7). Indeed it would appear that their prior knowledge helped them to place this 'part' of the story within the context of the overall larger story that had been taking place. For it is 'Prior knowledge' Graber explains, that 'provides schemata that facilitate the integration of new information. High prior knowledge', therefore, 'led to high learning rates' (Graber 1988:138).
However, for F21 and F26 a lack of prior knowledge appeared to have a significant impact on their understanding of the news item and subsequent recall. As Graber explains from her own research findings:
While they each knew that the story was connected with the 'Iraqi crisis' and that it was important, both had difficulty comprehending the actual story itself. This was not particularly surprising in the case of F26 who professes to have little interest in the news; for as Graber points out 'those with little interest in news could not focus their attention' (Graber). However, for F21, who does claim to have an interest in the news, there seemed to be other factors which may have contributed to her lack of understanding. For instance, F21 claims to rely heavily on guidance from the media as to what is important and what to attend to. She therefore felt that this story should have been the lead story, and more time should have been spent explaining it in full. According to Graber, ‘agenda-setting theories' suggest that 'people accept guidance from the media in determining what information is important. Media cues include frequent coverage and prominence' and will often influence 'the attention paid by the participants to news stories' (Graber). It is therefore possible that the lack of prominence given to this story by the BBC may have contributed to her lack of understanding.
However, there is an additional factor which must be taken into account in this instance; that of F21's preferred style of viewing. As stated earlier, F21 prefers to interact and talk while watching the news; this provides her with the opportunity to ask questions about various stories, and to clarify her understanding of the events taking place. However, as the participants were viewing the news broadcast under 'research conditions' she did not feel able to engage in this way, which she herself suggests, may have had an effect on her recall and understanding of the story.
The second story, concerning Gerry Adams and the IRA source denial, was particularly interesting from the point of view of the interpretative differences that this one news item generated for two of the participants - F21 and M35. The fact that the story began with the mention of Gerry Adams meeting with the Irish Prime Minister was completely overlooked by both participants. What was notable despite this omission, was the actual focus of attention for both participants. F21 was strongly influenced by the visuals shown throughout the item, which focused on the carnage left by the bomb explosions; the result of which meant that the message of this story was lost on her, rather the ‘meaning' became "how awful the bombings were". A similar finding was recorded by Justin Lewis who observed that in the process of making sense of an item and making the required links 'the most surprising piece of information to get 'lost' was the first part of the story' (Lewis 1991:133). Furthermore, 'the failure to make these links had a distinct effect upon the audience. The majority built their reading of the item upon the images of violence shown in the report' (Lewis 1991:133). These findings do seem to be applicable to the example provided by F21, where there is a strong emphasis on the importance of pictures in news stories (once the first part of the story had been 'lost'). Graber notes a similar emphasis, on the important function pictures played for participants. This includes making the news story more realistic, helping to clarify the story, and the emotional impact pictures can have (Graber 1988:172-3).
However, the focus of attention for M35 was quite different. While he did have more of an understanding of the story as a whole; his focus of attention was concentrated on the actual presentation of the news item. For although there were interviewed reactions to the IRA denial of involvement in the bombings, these were restricted to the 'Progressive Unionist Party' representative, with no comment from Gerry Adams or Sinn Fein. M35 therefore felt this was an unbalanced item, which in turn negated the validity and credibility of the news story itself . Such 'bias' in presentation was something which M35 felt the BBC were not supposed to display.
This issue of presentation did, however, raise another issue in interpretation, regarding the Sean Connery and Elton John stories which ran side by side. These were significant stories for M35, not only because they were of interest to him generally, but more importantly because of the way in which the stories were linked by the BBC. He stated that he already had a prior knowledge of the stories from news reports earlier in the day, but his interest was heightened further by the way in which the stories were presented together. For him there appeared to be a subtle ulterior motive for placing these stories side by side. He explains; "as Elton John is a well known homosexual and Sean Connery is a very straight sort of a guy. I thought it was just an interesting sort of story to run alongside it (Sean Connery story)", when I asked why, he added; "because that's very anti-establishment, whereas Sean Connery would be seen as much more of an establishment figure". He suggested that such presentation may have been deliberate on the part of the BBC because; "if the BBC were gonna show it, it might show their sort of leanings... that why should someone like Scan Connery be blocked by the Scottish Office for the Knighthood if someone like Elton John could get one".
This issue of whether the BBC deliberately leads viewers to come to certain conclusions was one which I raised with the participants, however, it was only M35 that admitted to feeling this way. This more 'critical' view may be a result of his long-standing interest in the news, which in turn could facilitate his evaluation of the news in this way. For the other participants, however, there was quite a strong trust in the BBC to present an unbiased coverage of news stories. Although it should be noted that these participants also expressed a difficulty in evaluating the news in general, a difficulty which Lewis reiterates, as he suggests that; 'most people find it difficult to evaluate television news. It is, after all, presented by people who look as if they know what they are doing' (Lewis 1991:152).
In conclusion, having looked at this complex issue of interpretation and how it can differ among viewers of the same news broadcast, it can be seen that there are a number of factors which must be considered in determining why these differences exist. As has been shown throughout the course of this study, participants can be influenced not only by the conditions under which they view a programme (especially where this contradicts their preferred style of viewing), but also by their lack of familiarity with the genre, and the structure of the narrative itself. In addition, differences in sense making and comprehension may rely on whether the participant has an actual interest in the story they are watching (and in some cases a prior knowledge of the item being covered), and indeed in the news in general. This was in fact found to be the key deciding factor which determined most of the responses throughout this study, and one which Graber stresses will determine the level of recall displayed by participants, and whether participants will actually learn from the news (Graber). But perhaps most importantly, we must consider the fact that as we are all individuals, we will each have different interests, and therefore different ideas and opinions of what we are viewing. Interpretation of such 'mediated communication' will therefore become, as Livingstone has suggested, a complex and constructive process; our role in which, is both motivated and diverse (Livingstone 1990:3).
April 1998
