What Is Happening to News: The Information Explosion and the Crisis in Journalism

by Jack Fuller

Across America, newspapers that have defined their cities for over a century are rapidly failing, their circulations plummeting even as opinion-soaked Web outlets like the Huffington Post thrive. Meanwhile, nightly news programs shock viewers with stories of horrific crime and celebrity scandal, while the smug sarcasm and shouting of pundits like Glenn Beck and Keith Olbermann dominate cable television. Is it any wonder that young people are turning away from the news entirely, trusting comedians like Jon Stewart as their primary source of information on current events?

In the face of all the problems plaguing serious news, What Is Happening to News explores the crucial question of how journalism lost its way—and who is responsible for the ragged retreat from its great traditions. Veteran editor and newspaperman Jack Fuller locates the surprising sources of change where no one has thought to look before: in the collision between a revolutionary new information age and a human brain that is still wired for the threats faced by our prehistoric ancestors. Drawing on the dramatic recent discoveries of neuroscience, Fuller explains why the information overload of contemporary life makes us dramatically more receptive to sensational news, while rendering the staid, objective voice of standard journalism ineffective. Throw in a growing distrust of experts and authority, ably capitalized on by blogs and other interactive media, and the result is a toxic mix that threatens to prove fatal to journalism as we know it.

For every reader troubled by what has become of news—and worried about what the future may hold—What Is Happening to News not only offers unprecedented insight into the causes of change but also clear guidance, strongly rooted in the precepts of ethical journalism, on how journalists can adapt to this new environment while still providing the information necessary to a functioning democracy.

Genres: Journalism, Nonfiction, Society

224 pages, Hardcover

First published May 15, 2010

About the author

Jack Fuller published six critically acclaimed novels and one book of non-fiction about journalism. He was a legal affairs writer, a war correspondent in Vietnam, a Washington correspondent, and a Pulitzer Prize-winning editorial writer.

Three of his novels have been included in the University of Chicago Press’s distinguished Phoenix Fiction series. In 2005, he retired from a career in newspapers to concentrate on book writing.

He began working in journalism at the age of 16 as a copyboy for the Chicago Tribune. Along the way he has worked for the Washington Post, Chicago Daily News, City News Bureau of Chicago, and Pacific Stars and Stripes. He left journalism for law briefly when U.S. Attorney General Edward Levi asked him to serve as his special assistant in the Department of Justice. At the Chicago Tribune he served as editor of the editorial page, editor, and publisher. When he retired, he was president of Tribune Publishing Co.

A graduate of Northwestern University and Yale Law School, he lived in Chicago with his wife, Debra Moskovits. He had two children, Tim and Kate.

Reviews

[Steve · Rating 2 out of 5]

Although I couldn't get into the book, it is not completely the fault of the author. When I picked it up, I was expecting a more head-on analysis of the news industry itself, rather than a dig into the neurological and cognitive aspects of the newsgatherers and consumers. In hindsight, there are probably many books out there that serve that exact purpose, which, in turn, probably makes this book very unique. But due to the way the information is presented, I fear it might only be accessible to a certain group of people who are looking for an explanation like this, or using similar methods, to figure out what is going on in the news industry.

[Noah Haggerty · Rating 4 out of 5]

I probably enjoyed this book as deeply as I did because I’m exactly the target audience: an aspiring (science) journalist. Fuller tries to tackle a lot here, from the neuroscience of the brain and how we process information to the philosophical currents over the past few centuries. At times it can feel a bit disjointed, but Fuller does a good job bringing these all together in the last three chapters exploring the detailed ethical questions of approaching fact-checking, the use of emotion in journalism, and the future of the profession. Fuller provides helpful and insightful advice for future journalists without letting his ego and decades of experience in the field embolden him to ascribe simple remedies for such a complex issue. The book is a bit dated — referring to Blackberries and emails instead of social media — but it remains incredibly relevant. As a young journalist, it’s given me a solid grounding in the issues facing the profession and ideas to chew on for years to come. I’m sure I’ll be revisiting this book as I dive even further into the field.

[Charles · Rating 3 out of 5]

The book has a lot of interesting information, but sort of meanders around dipping it's toes in philosophy, journalistic standards, evolutionary biology, neuroscience, the history of the press, and some of his concerns with its current status, with intermittent anecdotes from the author's time as a journalist. In the end it was a little anticlimactic because it feels like although we wandered around talking about some neat stuff, it didn't lead to any revelations or propositions. I still don't really feel like I understand what is happening to news.

[Daniel Watkins · Rating 3 out of 5]

Not sure what to think of this book. On the one hand, it shines a light into the scientific roots of changing responses to news, and provides interesting insights and anecdotes from the author's experience as an editor. On the other hand, at the end, it feels anticlimactic, like the author doesn't really know what to do about the information gained through writing the book.

[Katy Boungard · Rating 5 out of 5]

The best book i've been gifted in YEARS. Dense, but explains so much about the science behind media and our own perceptions of it. HIGHLY recommend especially with the current state of "fake news" etc.

[Wyld · Rating 5 out of 5]

How prescient for something written back in 2009/10

[Paul Signorelli · Rating 4 out of 5]

Jack Fuller, the Pulitzer Prize-winning former editor and publisher of the Chicago Tribune, proves with his book "What Is Happening to News" that all of us involved in workplace learning and performance need to read far beyond the artificial walls surrounding our field of play. While the book ostensibly leads us through the well-documented crisis and evolution of contemporary journalism, its focus on how our brains absorb and cause us to react to all the stimulus we encounter is perfect reading for anyone involved in training-teaching-learning. Fuller starts off with explorations of how our brains actually learn. His third chapter, "Models of the Mind," is particularly helpful both in its brief survey and its description of the physiological reasons why practice makes perfect: "the connection between neurons strengthens through the coincidence of their mutual firing. As the neuroscience slogan has it, 'Cells that fire together wire together.' The more frequent the coincidence, the stronger the connection" (p. 34). For Fuller, that helps explain why repetition of statements through the media we use has a long-term impact on how we perceive the world. And when he moves into a section on "the inundated brain," he offers a thought worth quoting not only to those interested in why news reporting focuses so much on negative stories but also to those of us interested in knowing what happens to learners who are attempting to do too many things at one time: "Time pressure alone also increases cognitive challenge and emotional response. Some studies have shown that when given tasks under severe deadlines, people use more negative information--which suggests that negative emotions are in play--than when doing the same task without being time pressured. Multitasking and information overload, too, increase the challenge to the brain’s processing resources. And when a erson'’s information processing capacity is stressed through information overload or multitasking, she is more likely to rely on emotional cues and use social stereotypes in making decisions about another person" (p. 61). News junkies and trainer-teacher-learners alike will find plenty to admire in Fuller's work--and will leave with a solid foundation for better serving the learners with whom they work.

[Bill · Rating 4 out of 5]

Jack Fuller is a member of that unlucky generation of journalists who were in charge when the online flood started to swamp the newspaper industry. Contrary to some popular cliches, Fuller and many of his colleagues were well aware of the challenges posed by the Internet and tried very hard to turn them into opportunities. The Chicago Tribune, where Fuller was editor and then publisher, invested heavily in digital publishing and brought some great ideas to fruition, many quite successful. Unfortunately, the circumstances undermining the economics of the newspaper business were beyond control.

In this book Fuller goes beyond the economics to look at some deeper issues that are affecting not just newspapers, but the future of journalism itself. His arguments are thoughtful and thought-provoking, particularly his analysis of the neuroscience of distraction and how it's affecting the audience for news.

[Craig Jorgensen · Rating 3 out of 5]

Jack Fuller provides a good analysis of what is happening to the quality of news reporting and why. At the nexus of the explosion of stimuli (electronic & otherwise) vying for our attention and the current neuroscience insights regarding human behavior this book makes sense of what is happening. Millions of years of evolution have prepared us to respond to certain stimuli in very fundamental ways and the media are taking advantage of those per-programmed behaviors in the most opportunistic and manipulative fashion. Its not the most engagingly written book, but what it tells us is very relevant. Unfortunately, the prescription Fuller recommends to update the "Standard Model of Journalism" to change the tide seems a little idealistic, and under-powered.