Customer Reviews

Tuned Out: Why Americans Under 40 Don't Follow the News

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

With all that is going on in the world right now, it's stunning to think how many people are out of touch with day to day news. The newspaper is now nothing more than the front page, maybe an eye-catching headline and the more importantly the horoscope and ads for groceries or cars, maybe the sports schedule or boxscore. TV news is reduced to glitz, glamour, Hollywood dirt, Washington scandal and the dog caught down a drain. At no time in world history has there been so much readily available media to the masses, sometimes unwillingly pumped into your subconscious by airports, banks and post offices on blaring televisions that have no off switch.. and this book eloquently examines why more watch less. To find out why so many have so often decided to watch or read so little news, Mindich hit the road; his journey is related as a classroom of the mind, challenging assumptions and explaining indifference. No one in the business of journalism - and lest no one be fooled, it is a business, a very profitable business for those who control it - and no one who is raising a child in this 21st century should miss a chance to learn why Americans under 40 are 'tuning out.' I heartily recommend educators who want their students to be informed about the world around them, to find a copy for their classroom.

As the title of this provocative new book suggests, journalism professor David Mindich has interviewed "young people"-a group he defines widely to include not only college-age students but also members of Generation X who are in their thirties-to find what they know about the world and how they get that information, as well as how they define "news." The answers are not encouraging. But this is not just another hand-wringing exercise, and the book asks broader questions. It explores the reasons why Americans in general have come to feel less of a sense of obligation to follow current events as they are reported in journalism today. The result, as he notes, is civic disengagement as well as disengagement with news media, a loss that diminishes people's sense of national identity as well as their pool of information about national issues.

Mindich contextualizes news against the backdrop of entertainment media with which it increasingly is confused, but avoids collapsing the two into a monolithic concept called "the media." Instead, he recognizes that newspapers, television news, and Internet news site have distinctive characteristics and varying impacts on and relationships with news audiences, in addition to a range of types and quality of news content. Given his own expertise in journalism history, he also provides truly useful context from the past in a sophisticated cultural discussion that draws on sources ranging from Walt Whitman to American Idol.

The central question Mindich asks is important not just with regard to the state of news today; as he points out, the present "tuned-out generations . . . will lead our children and grandchildren." In a larger sense, then, this book is about the future of news and its political, social, and civic functions in American life in an entertainment age and a multimedia world.

With statistics, personal anecdotes and a fine writing style, Mindich does an excellent job of describing a simmering crisis - the failure of young people to follow serious news coverage. Even better, Mindich describes creative solutions to this problem. If you're a teacher, parent, student, journalist or politician, then consider Tuned Out to be required reading!

David Mindich's new book, "Tuned Out" is a well-researched, if short attempt to tell us something we already know...that younger people, as a rule, pay scant attention to the news. The serious news, that is. Armed with collected data Mindich plows on, like a good college professor, describing in detail how the younger generation has tuned out. Indeed, the narrative often suggests that the reader is in the author's classroom as he dissects the problems associated with the topic. This is not your easy summer (or winter) read.

Anyone who has ever seen the segment on the "Tonight Show" called "Jaywalking" (where Jay Leno asks younger people on the street things about which they should know) will recognize the utter alarm many of us feel at the lack of knowledge these people being interviewed possess. Could these citizens really be THAT far removed from current events and history? They are. Mindich's book is like "Jaywalking" without the fun.

The author does make some excellent points. He devotes part of a chapter to local news and how appallingly bad most of it is. He's certainly right on that score. He also raises a question in his conclusion regarding civics. He writes, "we demand a civics test of everyone who wants to become a U.S. citizen; it seems fitting to have high school students take a news/civics test, too." This is an equally good point. We test citizens-to-be and then let them loose, in a manner of speaking, never to ask anything more of them once they become citizens.

I'm leery, however, of Mindich's assertion that we are in a "crisis". The lack of young people's interest in the news is growing and is disturbing but it is also an evolution which may or may not be as bad as he warns. Still, I recommend the book
for its acknowledgement of the problems that we, who are tuned in, face with those who are not, as a society.

Tuned Out aims to analyze why the under-40 population in America today don't follow the news. The author, David T.Z. Mindich, has clearly done his research with many surveys and reports cited. He talks to many young people, but seems to focus mainly on teens and those in their early twenties. Although the title claims fault with the 30-40 year old population, they are largely ignored.

Mindich does however argue a very good point. Young adults today would much rather watch entertainment news over local, national, or political news. With the internet available almost everywhere, and our country's "I want it now" attitude, people can pick and choose what they do and do not want to read. At the beginning of television, there were only a couple channels to pick from. The news was one of few choices. Today, with hundreds of channels available, there is always something else on that young people can choose over the news. In our celebrity obsessed culture, the latest Britney Spears stunt or which starlet is pregnant is more interesting to readers. Several years ago there were only a couple tabloids, mainly People and US Weekly. The genre has largely expanded with newsstands packed with choices. The younger population seems to feel that they can relate easier to these types of stories as opposed to which political candidate is gunning for higher taxes. Preferring to be blissfully ignorant, they have complete trust in what is going on in the government. Some even might contend that its something they'll deal with when they're older; that its their parents issue.

Mindich offers some solutions to integrating the news into young peoples' daily lives. One resolution is to establish a type of kid's news. Another is to devote less time on the airwaves to scandals. While he has very valid arguments, most of the information is nothing new. This issue has been continuing for many years. Maybe even since Vietnam have young people not pursued interest and involvement in current issues. In my opinion, the news cannot be forced upon anyone, there needs to be a shift where the younger population really wants to be informed.

Tuned Out is exactly that. This book proves that it is out of touch with American youth and their outlook on our country. Tuned Out makes many brass assumptions about the newest generation of Americans and the technological society in which we live. Through these assumptions, the author, David T. Z. Mindich, clearly shows his ignorance regarding the subject.
The author attempts to argue that due to the decreases in the number of people who read newspapers and watch broadcast television, Americans are now less informed about politics. This observation is inaccurate in its attempt to define the relationship between American youth and politics. While it is true that less Americans are reading newspapers and watching broadcast television, this is the result of advancements in technology and not the apathy of individuals. These advancements in technology, such as the Internet and portable media devices, let Americans access important information without having to pick up a newspaper or turn on a television.
American youth are just as informed, if not more informed, than previous generations of citizens. While new technologies do make information more customizable for the user, they do not breed a society that is indifferent to politics. Generations of the author's beloved past showed how apathetic they were to politics in this nation. Many were ill informed and would vote for candidates based solely on their political party, paying no attention to the candidate's philosophy and character. Today's Americans are kept up to date on important issues through the use of advanced technologies and are free to choose candidates who best fit their "customizable" beliefs.
Overall the author is outdated and indifferent to modern American society. He completely misses the point of the advancements made in technology and how they affect individuals. The author states his belief that American youth are apathetic towards politics, and that they will bring about the destruction of democracy. The truth is that only real threat to democracy is the type of ignorance that is displayed by the author.

The author speaks wistfully of when most people watched network news. But when the three networks news programs had that power, they abused it. Two decades ago Peter Jennings gave an interview in which he said that his job was not merely to present the news but also to interpret it.

What if you don't like the way a newscaster is interpreting the news, yet many millions watch that newscaster?

Nowadays nightly network news audiences have dropped to the point where it doesn't matter how a network news anchor interprets the news, because the audiences are small.

The author mentions favorably how Walter Cronkite had a big impact when he announced that the US was in a quagmire in Vietnam. But that was an opinion, not news.

The author is correct that the country is worse off for people not following the news. But the country is better off for the demise of those dinosaurs, the half hour network news broadcast and the weekly newsmagazine.

I bet the author didn't even study youth surfing the web.
If he had, he might have realized that today's youth are *highly* literate (not illiterate). They are also increasingly critical.

That is precisely *why* they are abandoning Network News. They know that it can't be trusted for the really important stuff, unless they're willing to drink the swill that is "spin".

The new generation does not need to be "inspired". What needs to happen is for the older generation to realize that the web surfing habits of the youth are both social and educational, in that they increase global knowledge by facilitating social interation unbound by geography.

20 years ago you learned about Vietnam by reading the paper.
Now kids just logon to MSN/ICQ/AOL, find someone living in Vietnam, and initiate a chat.

Does reading the paper *truly* provide a better indicator of what daily life is like in Vietnam?