Gatekeeping

Definition: Gatekeeping is a media term used to describe the filtering of stars and coverage through television and print. This derives from the gate in a camera through which the film has to pass before it is broadcast to the targeted audience. A message has to pass through many gates (filters) before it reaches its audience. This means that a selection of media topics are chosen to be presented to different audiences through different forms of media.

Reasons for Gatekeeping:

The Olympics have become more and more popular over the years. The numbers of events and sports in the Olympics have increased. This has led to gatekeeping of the Olympics (see "Gatekeeping and the Olympics") because we cannot possibly watch all the events that are going on and so decisions are made for audiences about which sports and events they are going to watch. Gatekeeping has become an acceptable part of television and audiences donÕt pay attention to it, or realise that a) it is going on, and b) the serious issues involved (see "Issues and problems of Gatekeeping"). Although, where does the bias or slant start? It starts with the camera-operators and the anchors who are at the site and what they choose to film. It is their personal decision what audiences see at home. It is all based on the values and attitudes of the gatekeepers.

Gatekeeping and the Olympics:

Gatekeeping is defined as the selection of media topics that are to be presented to different audiences through different types of media. But how is gatekeeping related to the Olympics? Well, there are a variety of different sports seen performed in the Olympics and each of these sports appeal to different audiences. For instance, whilst track events may appeal to a certain type of audience, synchronised swimming may appeal to another. If both events are on at the same time then gatekeepers will need to decided whether the demand to see the track events is greater than that of the synchronised swimming. If the demand to see both is the same, then gatekeepers consider broadcasting coverage of both of the events at the same time, continually jumping between the two events. However, if they can, gatekeepers try to avoid this option as it means that they have to pay twice as much as they would have to normally if they were only covering one event. As a result, a large percentage of the Olympics coverage viewed on Hong Kong television was of single events at a time. Events such as table tennis were given a lot of coverage because these events lasted for hours on end and television companies only had to pay a lump sum to cover it for as long as they liked. This is the reason why shorter events such as pole-vaulting are avoided as much as possible by smaller channels as it costs them more. Another way that gatekeeping was related to the Olympics was nationality bias. A lot of ChinaÕs gymnasts were given considerable amounts of coverage during the Olympics, as this is one of the events that China is very good at. However, they were given more coverage on the Chinese-speaking channels than on the English-speaking channels, as they tended to cover lots of western countries such as USA and Great Britain instead of the more obvious, eastern countries like the local channels. Past successful athletes were also given a lot of coverage by both English and Chinese speaking channels as they raised viewersÕ hopes that "favourites" would win medals. An example of this was the local Hong Kong wind surfer, Lee San San who won a gold at the Olympics in 1996 and was being counted upon to win another for her country. However, as soon as it became evident that she was not going to win another medal, coverage of wind surfing and Lee San San decreased considerably. Although a lot of events at the Olympics were covered in Hong Kong, a lot of others, such as archery and rowing weren't given much coverage at all. This was due to the fact that Hong Kong audiences weren't interested in events such as these and there was therefore no point in broadcasting them. It seems strange that there were so many events taking place in the Olympics and yet Hong Kong television stations still managed to overlap and cover the same events like boxing and football. However, we must keep in mind that in the end it all boiled down to who the events would appeal to and how many people would watch them. This resulted in sometimes two or even three different stations covering the same event as it was all attracting viewers to watch their stations.

Issues and problems of Gatekeeping:

For a media conglomerate to be successful, it needs to cater for the needs of different audiences. They need to target their audience and then decide what the best way is to either promote their product; or ultimately decide what their different audiences want to see. This happens all the time, all over the world. However, there are some very serious issues behind it like: What determines what people want to see? Who determines what people want to see? Are audiences simply fed information that producers assume they want to see, or do they actually want to see it? Are audiences categorised and if they are, what are they missing out on from other categories? How do categorised audiences obtain the "full" picture? Perhaps the most important question that is raised is who determines what audiences want to see, and why are they choosing for the audience? Why aren't the audiences choosing for themselves? Why are they allowed to do it? In the recent Olympics, there were many examples of gatekeeping that many viewers probably didnÕt notice, until something was shown that they didnÕt want to see; for example table tennis instead of gymnastics. This was particularly evident in "The Highlights of the Day". Media conglomerates, both print and television need to be able to differentiate between their audiences and how best to target them in a way that will make them more successful; be it through numbers of sales or viewers. It is how the media industry works. However what we need to consider is this: When do media conglomerates stop targeting their audiences and start choosing for them instead? When do media conglomerates stop looking to their audiences for the answers and give them the answers instead? The danger lies in the idea that audiences become passive and start to accept everything that the media tells them and they start to change who they are because they are being given the answers and they aren't giving them anymore.

Laura, Rowena, Emma and Lauren ÐYr. 11