Transfer of information
A series of interviews with Toshinao Sasaki on the future of technology and society.
The theme this time is mass media and the ‘future’ of newspapers and television.
I would like to ask you about the state of the media today. In the 1960s, communications scholar Wilbur Schramm identified the roles of the mass media as ‘surveillance’, ‘debate’ and ‘teacher’.
Toshinao Sasaki: There are various ways of thinking about the role of the media, but the first is to ‘convey information’, the second is to ‘monitor power’ and the third is to ‘set the agenda’ as to what is important for society at the moment.
In terms of ‘information dissemination’, the role of the media has declined with the advent of the internet. For example, in the case of newspapers, when a disaster or conflict occurs, information is transmitted more quickly on social networking services than in morning and evening newspapers.
Television is just as fast as the internet, but in many cases the internet is the source of information. There is a divergence between public opinion on TV and newspapers and on the internet.
For example, with regard to the approval rating of the government, the approval rating in opinion polls and the approval rating on the internet are close, and the LDP government attaches importance to the approval rating on the internet and transmits information on the internet to voters without going through newspapers or television.
In this way, I think it can be said that in the area of ‘information transmission’, it is no longer necessary to have mass media, but it is now possible to complete the process on the internet.
What do you think about "agenda setting"?
Sasaki: I think the internet is weak when it comes to ‘agenda-setting’. The internet is a world where information spreads without being consolidated, and where websites and SNS accounts are created without limit.
In other words, there is no finite frame of reference, so it is difficult to create a common understanding of what is important. In fact, this is why it happens that only a small part of the population on social networking sites gets excited.
On the other hand, newspapers and television transmit information within a limited frame, and the top of that frame is a guarantee of the importance of the news, or it appears important just by being published.
What do you think about "power monitoring"?
Sasaki: I think that monitoring power is also difficult on the internet. The key problem with the internet today is that it is not profitable. Monitoring power and investigative journalism is very expensive to cover, with a single piece of coverage costing hundreds of thousands of yen, or even more than a million yen depending on the coverage.
In the days without the internet, the number of media was limited and supply was low in relation to demand, so TV commercials and newspaper advertisements were expensive. Therefore, TV and newspapers used to be able to afford to compensate for the high cost of research.
The internet, on the other hand, can increase the amount of information as much as possible, resulting in excessive demand. Therefore, even if you set up a web media outlet, it is difficult for it to suddenly be read by millions of people. It is true that one article may accidentally get a buzz and be read by millions of people, but it is unlikely that an article written by that reporter will be read continuously.
In other words, it is impossible to do investigative reporting on the internet because it does not receive the same advertising budget as TV and newspapers used to. However, newspapers are also entering a phase of decline, with their circulation decreasing rapidly, and I think the question of what to do about investigative journalism and power monitoring after newspapers disappear is becoming a vexed issue.
