Study Probes: How to Reach Young Readers

By: Maegan Carberry As the general election kicks off this week, news organizations have a unique opportunity to use the enthusiasm for this presidential battle as an entry point for members of the "millennial" generation to develop a substantive news consumption habit, according to a new study by Northwestern University?s Media Management Center.

The challenge, the study notes, is not to inundate these new civic participants, who say they are overwhelmed by ?too much? election news online. (The full study, recommendations and methodology is available here: http://www.mediamanagementcenter.org/research/youthelection.pdf.) News organizations are also encouraged to design for efficiency and keep information brief-but-expandable, to use alternative storytelling like graphics or q-and-a's, to stick to facts and analysis as opposed to opinion, and to avoid gimmicky attempts at incorporating social media.

I shared the study with some colleagues Monday afternoon, and the feedback reinforced the takeaways, although several people questioned whether they shouldn?t apply to all first-time voters or light news consumers.

?Nobody likes 'too much' of anything, so these findings don't seem very unique to the millennials cohort,? said The Nation?s Ari Melber, who covers Internet politics, social media and web activism for the magazine.

Young or old, this is obviously true of an election cycle that began almost two years ago. The term ?fatigue? was already being thrown around when I was in Iowa last December for the caucuses, and we still haven?t even seen the two candidates debate yet.

The thing that stood out most to me in the study was the distinction young consumers make between wanting to be informed versus wanting to follow the news. Whereas I personally enjoy following the minutia of the campaign trail as much as a zealous NFL fan watches the stats, most of my peers prefer the highlight reel. A news outlet that can provide information about major milestones in quick context resonates most.

Likewise, establishing and owning a distinct, simple perspective is advantageous, particularly given the findings that young consumers don?t like mixing hard news with social media and that they prefer established national news brands or major aggregators as their primary sources of information.

As Ari also noted: ?This is the first generation to grow up online, and digital natives tend to be more comfortable learning from alternative news sources and relying on their networks to flag big news. Viral media also enables the counterculture to overtake the culture -- or parody to overpower reality -- since many more people can see a ?Daily Show? clip than the original broadcast of the cable personality lampooned in it.?

In this sense, as long as you establish clever packaging, being a brussel sprouts alternative to efforts like Think.MTV is the sweet spot.

My pal Andrew Satter, who is now an online video producer for Congressional Quarterly, puts this to practice daily. He worked with me on another Media Management Center millennial project in 2003, in which we discovered similar results about young/light consumers? response to non-political coverage as well, which are still relevant. (Read that here: http://www.mediamanagementcenter.org/research/genxy.asp) In either scenario, Andrew rightly points out that traditional media needs to own what he calls ?deep knowledge.?

?Humor is a powerful tool, one that ?Daily Show,? Slate, Politico, etc. use well and it compliments their brand,? he said. ?We have to own engaging explanatory multimedia journalism - not only does it suit our editorial voice, but it is in our best interest to inform and excite our audience about the way government works and the political process so that they further value our other editorial offerings.?

Andrew approaches multimedia content by sticking to the analytical and database-driven reporting that establishes the credibility of his publication, because as the study notes, millennial consumers still expect integrity in their news sources.

?We use interactive maps, databases and charts, as well as games that ultimately teach,? he said. ?My videos often blend analysis and historical context with graphics and animation to break down the political process.?

I would argue further, as we discovered in our 2003 study, that young consumers should be considered in two different cohorts: 18 ? 22 and 23 ? 28. Most of the people quoted in the study fall into the former category, and their level of engagement is significantly less than those in the latter, who are transitioning into a different level of maturity and, thus, sense of civic responsibility. News organizations may have better luck capturing the attention of the 23 ? 28 set this election season, a group that is now more reachable via social networking tools.

Other interesting tidbits:

*Although they identified with people their own age, seeing other millennials ?report? from street teams and using citizen journalism techniques did not pass the credibility threshold with the group studied. Perhaps David Gergen is sexy enough to woo the youngsters after all.

*Millennials want to see comments moderated and organized. Amen! There is way too much LOL-drivel and tangential chatter in interactive storytelling. I like the way Gawker does it, selecting some talented community members as designated commenters. This approach could be a way to bridge the aforementioned expert-youth commentator gap.

*If you?re a local outlet, you need to make it clear what unique, essential perspective you provide, since young consumers gravitate toward national news or aggregator brands.

CARE TO COMMENT? Go to the new E&P blog at:

The E&P Pub

Or write: maegan.carberry@gmail.com.
*
From an exchange I had after last week?s column, regarding whether millennials? alternative news consumption habits equate to a boom in civic participation:

?I know a lot of people, including friends of mine, who write brilliant white papers for major civic engagement foundations, who believe -- as you do -- that 'we're experiencing a civic revival at the moment because the Internet has made it easy for people to be part-time activists.' I wish we were, in fact, experiencing a true civic revival, but we are not. Not even close. Only surface trappings. And part of the reason for that is the notion that it should be easy to do the work of citizenship. It is not. And we are kidding, and killing, ourselves if that idea remains unchallenged.

"There were a number of great pieces written about six months ago, I can't recall where, about how limited, and perhaps counter-productive it is to think that serious civic engagement is happening because someone (for example) clicks on a Facebook ''cause,' or forwards a 'political' video to friends -- as if these simple nano-second efforts are equal to the real work of citizenship. Not that there's anything wrong with doing those things, and if it helps serve as an entry point for a young person I'm all for it, but it's no substitute for the real deal -- for doing what's necessary to become a wise and effective citizen. That's where the rubber meets the road.

"It's my belief that we have to quickly move beyond our magical thinking about new tech tools. Tools come and go, new ones are always invented. I love them, I use them all, I make a living with some of them -- but they are not the answer. Just tools.

"The answer is a mind-shift. The good news is that today there are no obstacles to a citizen seeking to inform him or herself. Every major newspaper in the world is available for free online. And there's no obstacle to engaging in real life problem-solving, and getting the attention of policy makers. But it does take work and time. But that only comes after people realize the vital need to transform ourselves from citizen slackers into citizen superheros.?

- Jeffery Abelson