Online Content, A Day in the Life - Annual Report 2006

By 2005 users were already getting a significant level of choice in style and personality from news on the Web. Virtually all original newsgathering, though, was still being done by the old media, and some of the major new Internet-only challengers appeared to have made less progress in content over the previous year than the sites of the old media.

There was also a range of serious attempts to exploit the multimedia dimensions of the Web some places, immediacy in others, and to turn the Web into a space for advertorial revenue.

In our first two years of studying news online, we found that the extent to which sites were taking advantage of the potential of the Web varied dramatically, and that still appears to be true. We also found that the notion of a new form of journalism forming in this medium was premature. That is still true. Over all in past years at least the top stories people found online were often deeper in sourcing and content than what was on television, but it lagged behind print. Our sample this year suggests that may be changing. The Internet is an environment that may now, on some sites at least, be richer than what is available anywhere else.

In those previous studies, we examined a variety of news sites several times a day for 20 different, randomly selected days. This year, as part of our Day in the Life of the News study, we examined seven sites repeatedly through the course of the one day — May 11, 2005 — comparing them to what was offered elsewhere and to each other. Beyond just a purely statistical or quantitative look, we delved more deeply into the sites, forming qualitative impressions as well.

By the numbers, the Web environment was rich. The five national Internet sites we examined were more deeply sourced than any other media studied, including national newspapers. Fully 85% of top stories on the Internet contained four or more sources, outstripping any other media (in national newspapers it was 78%, and on network evening news, the most deeply sourced TV outlet, it was 31%). The two local-news Internet sites studied also scored high on sourcing.

The Web also rivaled major papers in how much was disclosed about sources. In both national newspapers and Web sites, 9 out of 10 stories contained at least two sources who were so thoroughly identified that audiences not only knew what their expertise was but any potential biases they might have. Consumers could evaluate for themselves what sources were saying.

The major Internet sites were also second only to the major national papers in how much context their stories offered audiences about events. In our index measuring how many contextual elements the big stories of the day contained, 45% of the ones online contained three or more, as opposed to 57% for national newspapers. The highest scoring TV outlet was network morning news at 39%.

The national Internet sites were also relatively free of reporters’ opinions, at least in their lead stories. Only 6% contained opinion from journalists, compared with 15% of all national newspaper stories, 48% of network morning news stories, and 46% of cable news stories.

The main national sites also tended to agree on the top story of the day. At 9 a.m., four of the five national sites had the same top story, violence in Iraq . Twelve hours later, four would again agree on their top story, the scare in Washington over a small plane that violated restricted airspace.

Beyond the numbers, however, there was far more difference to these sites than might appear at first glance.