Youth and (new) media

12 preliminary conclusionsof a research project on crossmedia community sites for younger people by Mechelen University College (KHM) Belgium - Departments Journalism and Informatics (A. Daems, Dr. V. Franssen, Dr. F. Hellemans)

Research aim

A team of KHM-researchers have been investigating the media-habits of both high school pupils (16- to 18-year old) and college students (19- tot 24-year old) since September 2008. 35 in-depth interviews with teenagers and twenty something people, added to an online survey of about 200 students, regarding their (new) media-usage, have led to 10 preliminary conclusions that will be corroborated with further research by May 2010.

Deliverable

An international symposium at KHM/Belgium on May the 7th , 2010 deals with the final results of this research project. (For more details on the research method and the upcoming youth and (new) media-conference: see www. mec.be and/or contact annet.daems@khm.be)

Community media

by and for younger people as the central focus

focus on 5 aspects:

How do younger people consume (traditional) and perceive news-content?How do younger people consume and perceive (new) Web 2.0. media-content?How interactive are younger people in their (new) media-behavior? Do they actually participate in the daily business of user generated content (UGC)?

focus on 5 aspects:

Do they consider themselves as a new net-generation?How could younger people engage themselves in the construction of community sites by and for younger people? (Listing of best practices, regarding already existing social network sites for younger people, will eventually lead to a set of do’s and don’ts for the making of such community websites.

12 preliminary conclusions

Conclusion 1

They are traditional ‘news’ consumers30 percent of the pupils (16- to 18-yeaolds) daily watch the news (on Tv and/or internet)50 percent of the students (19- to 24-year olds) daily watch the news

Conclusion 2

Only interested in what is linked to them

Political and economical news are of no (political) or very low (economical) interest whereas news that connects to them personally (their personal interests and habitat) is of great interest. Especially lifestyle news for younger people, broadly speaking (events for younger people, news from the subculture scene) scores very high.

Conclusion 3

News as such should be straightforwardReal, ‘hard’ news should be kept separate from the so called ‘soft’ news. In the same way news information as such may not be combined with ‘fun’-news. Only teenagers like a more humoristic approach in news broadcasts and also enjoy ‘positive’ news.

Conclusion 4

Do not label themYounger people don’t like to be targeted as such by the media. Therefore: never explicitly address a young audience as ‘young’.

Conclusion 5

give them clear & understandeble factsAs a matter of fact, younger people have a very traditional appetite for news, both in its content and expression. Especially the student test group identifies itself with the more mature taste for serious, factual news that is typical of an older generation.

Conclusion 6

DifferentiateThe 16- to -18 year old pupils like the idea of a news program for younger people – but not presented by their peer group, but by elderly journalists. On the contrary, the 19- to -24 year old students don’t ask for a news format for younger people.

Conclusion 7

Provide them with Wiki’sBoth young and younger audiences agree that a no nonsense summary of the most important news , along with some basic (chrono)logical explanation, is very much required.

Conclusion 8

Keep news & private separatedYounger people dismiss the integration of news information into social networksites, such as Facebook, as absolutely ludicrous. Sites, like Facebook, are ‘funsites’ and therefore not suited for something as serious as news information. The same is true for the cell phone. It’s an instrument for fun and chatting, but not a medium for news information.

Conclusion 9

They’ re not the prosumers as preachedAlmost 50 percent of the student test group posted some kind of content online but only in the private sphere: related to friends or family. Nobody of the test audience ever posted serious news online. A small percentage made some comments online on news events already provided, but nothing else.

Conclusion 9

Moreover, nobody was prepared to do an effort and to post news information online. They agreed that serious news information online should be restricted to the usual suspects, that is: to the professional journalists. When younger people put journalistic UGC online, they should always do it with the assistance of experienced journalists.

Conclusion 10

Authency & recognition = confidenceceAs a matter of fact, young people are eager Web 2.0.-users but they associate UGC with fun and personal aspirations that should be kept apart from the traditional news information. If younger people want to put UGC online, there should be professional gatekeepers to keep an eye on.

Conclusion 11

Internet is for entertainementYounger people strongly belief that they don’t spend more time in computer communication in general than their parents but they agree that they spend more time doing Web 2.0. applications (like MSN, YouTube, MySpace) than their parents. However, this doesn’t mean that they think of themselves as the new (inter)net-generation - generation Y – nor Einstein generation (as applied labels in literature)

Conclusion 12

The Einstein generation has yet to come?Even 16- to 18-year olds (the pupils test group) like to believe that they are not the (inter)net-generation but refer to the net generation as being even younger than they are.

Next steps

Processing data of 200 inquiries with 16-18 and 19-24 on their media use and media participationProcessing data of surveys with online community providersAnalysis of some successful and less successful youth media initiativesMajor inquiry by the users of online news and information communities to analyse the critical success factors of the initiatives