Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 16 items :

  • "television news presentation" x
Clear All

communication ( Tsfati et al. 2010 ; Mujica and Bachmann 2013 ). The present study is interested in the values of nonverbal resources, specifically eyebrow flashes as one of the communicative resources adopted by newsreaders in television news presentation. The discourse of broadcast news is shifting toward a more “conversational” approach ( Montgomery 2007 ; Fairclough 1994 ). Thus, rather than assuming a traditional poker-face delivery of news on television, newsreaders as televised personae are now becoming more “informal” and “dialogic.” The style of television news

FREE ACCESS

? 239 Lyudmyla Zaporozhtseva Darth Vader in Ukraine: On the boundary between reality and mythology 261 Zhengrui Han and Hongqiang Zhu Stance markers in television news presentation: Expressivity of eyebrow flashes in the delivery of news 279 Review article/Compte rendu Colas-Blaise Marion La sémiotique des formes de vie, un nouveau tournant ? 301 2018 | Issue 221 Semiotica

remember from television news stories compared with print versions of the same stories that consisted of literal transcripts of the television narratives.1 However, these experimental television-print news comparisons were conduc- ted almost exclusively among highly educated young adults (college or univer- sity students). Most of these studies, indeed, found that adults remembered more from print news than from a comparable television news presentation (DeFleur, Davenport, Cronin & DeFleur, 1992; Facoiro & DeFleür, 1993; Furnham & Gunter, 1985; Furnham & Gunter, 1987

, Nathan, and Daniel Patrick Moynihan. Beyond the Melting Pot: The Negroes, Puerto Ricans, Jews, Italians, and Irish of New York City. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1970. Goodman, David. Radio’s Civic Ambition: American Broadcasting and Democracy in the 1930s. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011. Gordon, James Thomas. “A History of Local Television News Presentation.” M.A. thesis, Ohio State University, 1987. Gorman, Paul R. Left Intellectuals and Popular Culture in Twentieth- Century America. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1996. Gray, Koshonna L

“thank you for joining us”). One particularly interesting non-linguistic example comes from TV news presentations in which an anchor’s and a reporter’s visual sagittal gazes are parallel as they stand shoulder-to-shoulder, which is blended to mean that the two are looking at each other. As Turner claims, “this multimodal form-meaning pair [is] entirely standard and recognized as unproblematic for TV broadcast news [but] impossible for classic joint attention. It is a canonical form-meaning pair of BCJA in opposition to the classic joint attention form-meaning pair

” refers to that spot on the broadcast screen, not to the spot on the monitor that the anchor is actually seeing. There are many such classes of multimodal construction for blended classic joint attention in TV broadcasts. For example, in classic joint attention, if two people’s visual sagittal gazes are parallel as they stand shoulder-to-shoulder, it means that they cannot see each other’s eyes. But in the TV news presentation of anchor and reporter in the field, it means exactly that they can see each other, frontally. This is a multimodal form-meaning pair entirely

events. Story Schemata provide a framework for detailed comprehension, and Mandler and Johnson (1977) argue that when a 194 John Tulloch and Marian Tulloch story deviates from an idealized structure, story recall is poorer, particu- larly for episodes that are incompletely presented. Different generic forms have different conventions about structure. Gunter (1987) presents evi- dence that the traditional structure of television news presentation (in which highly salient, and often visually gripping material is presented first) leads to lower levels of comprehension

structural aspects of current television news presentations are particularly user-hostile. The brevity of most stories is a major culprit (Graber 1990). Three out of four television news stories last less than three minutes. Nearly a third run for less than one minute. During news conferences or presidential debates, conventions of brevity commonly force participants to limit their answers to three minutes or less. Such brief snippets are hardly sufficient to provide adequate information about most political happenings, including essential facts, contexts, and guides for

messages, thereby shifting activity from the right to the left brain, the memorability advantage was lost. As always, there is also a negative side. Some research findings lend credence to the charge that television pictures may focus the audience’s attention on irrelevant visuals at the expense of important substance. Vivid television news presentations may decrease recall of factual details significantly and reduce the cognitive complexity with which viewers think about these stories (Milburn and McGrail 1992; Frey and Eagly 1993). Reduction of “cognitive complexity

televisual frames opening on to hyped-up (soon to be “embed- ded”) reporters, all providing the tense, carnivalesque atmosphere now de rigeur in TV news presentation. As widely observed, the Iraq war was television’s sanitized war: embedded reporting was a genius tactic assuring media collusion with US military interests, where breathless reporters could invoke World War II-style hero- ics while suppressing images of Iraqi dead and wounded.12 Together, these elements typify the common features of what Simon Dalby has referred to as the reductive yet dramatically