Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The rapid development of online media as a major location for news consumption has stimulated a variety of debates about how journalism is changing in the Internet era. Of particular importance have been worries about a potential turn toward populism, whereby journalists and editors shift away from reporting what is newsworthy to what their audience wants to hear supported by the widespread availability of audience metrics. A wealth of ethnographic research has pointed to the potential importance of such statistics; but little quantitative work has been conducted to test for the existence of a relationship between audience behavior and editorial decisions. This study seeks to fill that gap. Based on a novel data set of over 40,000 articles published in five major UK news outlets over a period of 6 weeks, we explore the relationship between a news story’s readership and its likelihood of being removed from the front page, based on the “most read” lists common to many news websites. We find that being a most read article decreased the short-term likelihood of being removed from the front page by around 25% and that this effect was broadly similar for both political and entertainment news. Surprisingly, we find a considerably greater influence in “quality” publications than their tabloid counterparts. Our results are discussed as evidence of a still limited, but potentially developing, turn toward online populism.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bright et al. (2013) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: