New values are considered to be common guidelines or criteria applied by media outlets in order for them to determine how much attention they will give to a particular story. They are in fact fundamental to understanding new production and the choices that editors and other journalists face when determining what is deemed to be newsworthy and what is not. There are seven news values which focus and direction information into appropriate categories these include: composition, continuity, cultural proximity, elite references, negativity, personalisation, rarity and relevance.
In the modern world media outlets all really just want to obtain audiences and therefore keep them entertained. In order to do so media outlets have turned to celebrities and their news as being the forefront of the media. However, this creates the criticism of news values as today the focus is on celebrity based news and quite often real world issues are overlooked simply because they are not seen as “entertaining” as hearing about somebody like Miley Cyrus twerk it.
Whether we choose to accept it or not celebrity news has in fact become an important feature of the media. What has been described as a major shift in contemporary journalism, celebrity news has transformed from an array of print and television outlets, into a category of content found across various media channels. The demand for celebrity news is constantly increasing; therefore media outlets will do whatever it takes to acquire the latest and most sensational story.
We live in a world that is evolving rapidly, so is the nature of film industries in terms of production and distribution. We now see the emergence of transitional film industries as a result of the shift in global film cultures, breaking down the traditional geographic barriers. Both transnational and global film industries are hybrids of numerous cultures, nations and creative minds, therefore producing a melting pot of representations and interpretations.
Due to an increase in number of films that attract international markets, films that are being produced can no longer be identified with a specific nation. Today films are shot in numerous countries, therefore mixing both local and global elements to appeal to audiences trends and tastes (Shaefer & Kara 2010). As well as this, film industries are also becoming more reliant on multinational cast and crew, and other resources available to them.
One example of a transnational film is ‘Slumdog Millionaire’. A movie set both set and filmed in India followed the story of a teenage boy who appears on “Who wants to be a Millionaire” – an American originated program, therefore Western. Western culture was evident in the film and it wanted to target Western audiences through references such as a classic tourist scene being shot at the Taj Mahal.’
Not only is the Indian film industry thriving off movies like Slumdog Millionaire but it is also inspiring top USA film directors to bring more of the Indian culture and experience into the western world of America.
“Asian film industries, particularly those of India and China will wrestle control of global film flows from Western dominace”. The film is a great illustration of the way in which India as well as China are challenging Hollywood’s current hegemony.
Media capitals are places where things come together and, consequently, where the generation and circulation of new mass culture forms become possible. They can also be considered as sites of mediation, locations where complex forces and flows interact (Curtin 2003).
Hollywood is seen as notorious in terms of being a media capital. It seems that to be considered a media capital, countries have to somehow in some way frame the United States in order to be successful. At the same time America has the ability to set it’s own agenda without the external forces of other nations.
However, it is now evident that the Hollywood is in competition with other nationals which has resulted in, not a massive declination, but a redirection of what type of media is consumed in certain nations. This shift could perhaps be due globalisation and a rise of multiculturalism within western nations, Hollywood now has to contend with other media capitals such as in Asia or India who can produce TV and film and distribute internationally at a cheaper price.
“ Such anxieties suggest how the geography of television is changing and how Hollywood’s status as a global media capital remains, but the conditions of its dominance have been altered dramatically.” – Curtin 2003.
Oprah Winfrey a media goddess is an example of an American network that lost it’s notoriety. The OWN premiered on the first of January 2011 with approximately 80 million viewers, replacing the Discovery Health Channel. In the first week it was watched by an average of 505, 000 viewers. The channel was to undergo a major overhaul as by May 2012 the channels losses were estimated to be $330 million. So why did it fail?
Many fans of Oprah or there attraction to her is the intimacy she has with her audiences, treating the audience as friends .People enjoyed the intimacy that they got having one hour of there day with Oprah. By creating a network of shows that did not feature Oprah herself broke the intimacy and ultimately the connection between home viewers and her causing a decline in popularity. Oprah is an American icon therefore if there such a decline amongst her network what does this imply about the status of Hollywood as a whole.
Curtin believes that Hong Kong is now considered as the greatest TV and film influence in China. Due to it’s population shows obviously reach larger audiences then they would in Hollywood. It can be believed that because of this one day Hollywood will accept a greater amount of global influence into its own media production, allowing the true global potential of media to be recognised.