Exploring Cognitive Dissonance in a News Environment..

I've spent a lot of time over the last few weeks exploring cognitive dissonance in the news, or to be more precise how we as individuals strive for consonance in our news consumption.

Generally speaking, cognitive dissonance represents a state in an individual in which various cognitive elements (such as beliefs, values, feelings, actions or information) are in contradiction with each other.

This article by Joe Pompeo for Vanity Fair got me thinking about how two competitive news publishers have chosen polar opposite approaches to the idea of reducing cognitive dissonance among (new/existing) audiences in a broadcast news environment.

The NY Times top brass is reigning in appearances from their journalists on what it considers partisan cable news shows in a bid to decrease undermining their own integrity.

The Washington Post on the other hand fully embrace any platform that offers them exposure to new audiences, regardless of partisan views.

...There isn't a right or wrong answer to this strategy, both are efforts in decreasing cognitive dissonance within a broadcast news environment.

Conservative Approach:

The New York Times refuses to allow it's journalists to engage in shows that promote opinionated debate in a live environment. Live is the important bit to consider as it's more difficult for individuals (audiences) to consume information selectively, thus allowing them to reduce feelings of dissonance.

The New York Times doesn't engage therefore their reporters don't get caught up in debate where they could alienate themselves, the paper or create situations of exposing alt-opinion audiences to dissonant information - which could strengthen as well as sway their views.

Radical Approach:

The Washington Post is happy to engage in this kind of debate in an effort to draw in new audiences, potentially at the risk of strengthening views of those on the other side of the debate or creating opportunities to alienate prospective paid readers.

Latest Gallup figures report that trust in TV news is at it's lowest level ever in the US, so there is an argument to pull back from debate in this environment - the same could be said for actively participating in it. 

Both publications have been investing heavily in reader revenue strategies to drive online membership, and as such are acutely aware of the need to find balance between attracting new and retaining existing audiences, guarding as well as sharing opinion - especially when growth is paramount to their success.

If you would like to discuss this in more detail please reach out to us [email protected]