Nieman Foundation at Harvard
HOME
          
LATEST STORY
Nothing against the “Death Star,” but the LA Times thinks its new daily news podcast can go where the biggies can’t
ABOUT                    SUBSCRIBE
Aug. 14, 2019, 10 a.m.
LINK: www.journalism.org  ➚   |   Posted by: Laura Hazard Owen   |   August 14, 2019

Some groups of Americans value local news more than others: People over 50, black Americans, and Americans with a high school education or less are more likely than other groups to say that they follow local news “very closely,” and they prefer getting that news from TV rather than online, according to research Pew published on Wednesday. (This report builds on a larger local news report that Pew published earlier this year.)

People under 50, meanwhile, are also less likely to pay for local news. To be clear, just 14 percent Americans of any age pay for it; most also believe that local news is doing well financially. But just 7 percent of 18- to 29-year-olds and 9 percent of 30- to 49-year-olds pay anything for local news (subscription, donation, or membership), compared to 29 percent of people over 65. The primary reason that 18- to 29-year-olds give for not paying for local news is that they aren’t interested in it.

That isn’t necessarily surprising. Twentysomethings move a lot (though less than they used to) and are less likely than older people to own homes or have kids in local schools.

Meanwhile, Americans with a high school education or less are more likely to say they follow local news than groups with more education; they’re also more likely to follow local news than national news, while college-educated Americans say the opposite.

Since less-educated Americans are also more likely to be poor, the report calls to mind the “information pyramid,” a concept that a group of local journalists recently came up with to describe the hierarchy of journalism needs — and how local news organizations might switch their priorities.

“A huge amount of journalistic resources go into the top of the pyramid to serve the abstract needs of a comfortable few, completely passing over the basic information needs of a great many,” they wrote. “Journalists routinely cover inequity as an abstract phenomenon that can be observed and remarked upon from afar, but it’s a rare media organization that would produce a guide for navigating rural poverty, or managing an opioid addiction, or handling your lease when you’re getting gentrified out of your neighborhood.”

Pew’s full report is here.

Show tags Show comments / Leave a comment
 
Join the 50,000 who get the freshest future-of-journalism news in our daily email.
Nothing against the “Death Star,” but the LA Times thinks its new daily news podcast can go where the biggies can’t
“When you say national, usually what that means is New York or D.C. We’re trying to read that so that the gravity is really coming out of Southern California and expanding outward from that.”
How The New York Times assesses, tests, and prepares for the (un)expected news event
Rather than hastily address issues in the months leading up to big events where we expected lots of reader traffic, we decided to take stock of our systems as a whole and enact longer term resilience measures.
I have come to bury Knewz, not to praise it
News Corp’s painfully named news aggregator promised to somehow battle “crass clickbait,” filter bubbles, media bias, and two trillion-dollar companies, all at once. It ended up being a D-minus Drudge clone and OnlyFans blog.