“很难说我有多喜欢这个节目”:听众对真实犯罪播客中道德规范的看法

IF 0.9 Q3 COMMUNICATION Australian Journalism Review Pub Date : 2022-11-01 DOI:10.1386/ajr_00104_1
C. Graham, Kylie Stevenson
{"title":"“很难说我有多喜欢这个节目”:听众对真实犯罪播客中道德规范的看法","authors":"C. Graham, Kylie Stevenson","doi":"10.1386/ajr_00104_1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This research seeks a clearer understanding of listener perspectives on issues of ethics in true crime podcasts (TCPs). To do so, the study first divides TCPs into three subgenres: Documentary, Recap and Expert. Then, it uses a mixed methods content analysis of listener reviews (n = 1200) of TCPs to ascertain listeners’ value systems and preferences when assessing podcasts, the role of ethics in audience evaluations of TCPs and the impact of subgenre on listener response. It finds that a large subsection of the reviewer audience (29.7 per cent) privileged ethics as a key criterion for evaluating and reviewing podcasts and that listeners’ level of engagement with issues of ethics is specific, careful and nuanced. It also finds that subgenre can play a role in shaping engagement with content, with Documentary and Recap formats more likely to result in listeners relating to content as entertainment.","PeriodicalId":36614,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journalism Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"‘It doesn’t feel right to say how much I enjoyed this’: Listener perspectives on ethics in true crime podcasts\",\"authors\":\"C. Graham, Kylie Stevenson\",\"doi\":\"10.1386/ajr_00104_1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This research seeks a clearer understanding of listener perspectives on issues of ethics in true crime podcasts (TCPs). To do so, the study first divides TCPs into three subgenres: Documentary, Recap and Expert. Then, it uses a mixed methods content analysis of listener reviews (n = 1200) of TCPs to ascertain listeners’ value systems and preferences when assessing podcasts, the role of ethics in audience evaluations of TCPs and the impact of subgenre on listener response. It finds that a large subsection of the reviewer audience (29.7 per cent) privileged ethics as a key criterion for evaluating and reviewing podcasts and that listeners’ level of engagement with issues of ethics is specific, careful and nuanced. It also finds that subgenre can play a role in shaping engagement with content, with Documentary and Recap formats more likely to result in listeners relating to content as entertainment.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36614,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian Journalism Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australian Journalism Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1386/ajr_00104_1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journalism Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1386/ajr_00104_1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本研究旨在更清楚地了解听众对真实犯罪播客(tcp)中道德问题的看法。为了做到这一点,该研究首先将tcp分为三个亚类型:纪录片,概述和专家。然后,使用混合方法对听众评论(n = 1200)进行内容分析,以确定听众在评估播客时的价值体系和偏好,道德在听众评价中所起的作用以及亚类型对听众反应的影响。研究发现,很大一部分的评论听众(29.7%)将道德作为评估和评论播客的关键标准,听众对道德问题的参与程度是具体、谨慎和微妙的。研究还发现,亚类型可以在塑造听众对内容的参与方面发挥作用,纪录片和重述形式更有可能让听众将内容视为娱乐。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
‘It doesn’t feel right to say how much I enjoyed this’: Listener perspectives on ethics in true crime podcasts
This research seeks a clearer understanding of listener perspectives on issues of ethics in true crime podcasts (TCPs). To do so, the study first divides TCPs into three subgenres: Documentary, Recap and Expert. Then, it uses a mixed methods content analysis of listener reviews (n = 1200) of TCPs to ascertain listeners’ value systems and preferences when assessing podcasts, the role of ethics in audience evaluations of TCPs and the impact of subgenre on listener response. It finds that a large subsection of the reviewer audience (29.7 per cent) privileged ethics as a key criterion for evaluating and reviewing podcasts and that listeners’ level of engagement with issues of ethics is specific, careful and nuanced. It also finds that subgenre can play a role in shaping engagement with content, with Documentary and Recap formats more likely to result in listeners relating to content as entertainment.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Australian Journalism Review
Australian Journalism Review Social Sciences-Communication
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
期刊最新文献
Younger audience perceptions of journalists on social media Journalism Practice and Critical Reflexivity, Bonita Mason (2023) Happiness in Journalism, Valérie Bélair-Gagnon, Avery E. Holton, Mark Deuze and Claudia Mellado (eds) (2023) An examination of factors influencing journalism educators’ perceptions on the role and future of news reporting ‘You can’t be what you can’t see’: A pilot study of reflections on diversity and inclusion in the news media
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1