While eating my cafeteria pasta during lunch on Sept. 10, I watched someone die from a violent shooting and didn’t even realize it.
After seeing the video, my friend and I just scrolled away from the Instagram reel, thinking it was just another sick joke made by attention-seekers online. In reality, it was an uncensored clip showing the assassination of Charlie Kirk, the right-wing media personality and political activist who had been speaking to a crowd at Utah State University.
As the day went on, news outlets released increasingly detailed reports on the assassination, but not before I received text messages from friends and family (even my 13-year-old younger sister) who had all seen some version of the video on X or Instagram and were understandably freaking out.
Though extreme, this was one of many instances in recent years where news traveled much faster on social media than on traditional news outlets — and it’s proof that the era of TV news as the main source of breaking news is ending.
Despite the unreliable nature of most social media posts in comparison to long-standing TV news channels, a study by the Pew Research Center found that more than half of Americans get their news from social media, especially from Facebook, YouTube and TikTok. On the other hand, traditional news media on all fronts are on the decline, including on news websites, physical newspapers and local TV news stations.
Once a centerpiece of American life, physical TV stations are increasingly becoming relics of the past, preferred primarily by older generations. As daily TV news loses popularity and social media becomes faster at delivering quickly developing content than traditional news, it seems local TV stations and media may face even harsher financial struggles as they compete with social media for subscribers and viewers.
This reality is unfortunately not new for journalists — the majority of newspapers and TV stations are using social media platforms in an attempt to stay relevant and connect with readers. After all, social media is much more convenient for the average American — with just a tap of your phone screen, all the news you can possibly consume is already at your fingertips.
Plus, short-form video content representative of social media news is much more engaging for viewers and much easier for people to find what they want to watch.
But of course, the rise of social media doesn’t equate to quality journalism. Fueled by views and likes that rely on videos with bright, attention-grabbing visuals for the dopamine boost, social media may reach audiences faster but the information tends to be exaggerated and falsified by nature.
As technology like AI and video editing became mainstream, the internet has essentially become a feeding ground for misinformation — online, it’s all too easy for anyone to say anything for anyone to believe.
This tendency of social media is also what prompts people to post shocking and morbidly eye-catching content like the assassination of Charlie Kirk, which algorithms oftentimes end up forcing upon kids like me, my sister and even younger audiences.
Not only are these grisly posts disrespectful to his memory and family, they are also completely unnecessary. People don’t need an explicit depiction of murder to understand what happened at the scene.
And while these graphic videos do eventually get taken down by social media content moderators, it doesn’t make those who did see it forget.
On the flip side, respected traditional media outlets have editors and producers who seek to curate their content for the sake of their reputation or just out of respect for their viewers. Though it does require more time compared to the one-hit-send style of social media, its value isn’t lost, though now increasingly overshadowed by social media. With paywalls and warnings, legitimate news sources also give viewers a choice for media they want to consume on their websites, and most of it is much more accurate as well.
In addition, traditional news sources help put events into context and provide deeper insights into the politics and events of the world, something that social media — especially as short-form content — can’t match.
These days, though, too few consumers recognize value inherent in respected traditional news sources. Even at school, SHSTV shut down for this year due to a lack of signups and the school’s inability to find qualified staff members to run it.
Yet, students still have access to the same information from other sources such as the Friday Newsletter, morning announcements and The Falcon, which is now mostly a website and newsletter, with a print magazine coming out six times a year. For most, losing SHSTV as a source on school news has had little to no effect on how informed the student body is.
On the global scale, it’s true that TV news is steadily declining in popularity and will likely continue doing so with social media replacing traditional news for many Americans. But it’s also true that the world of news can’t successfully sustain quality information with just social media. To ensure that our public remains educated and properly informed, traditional news must both survive and evolve into different forms.
That might mean little to no daily TV stations, a greater reliance on online news or the growth of videos on social media created by actual journalists instead of random, untrained influencers.
More and more, journalists working for traditional news sources like newspapers and broadcast outlets are taking the necessary steps to keep up with the changing times. But even if things become more difficult financially for old-school media, the need for well-edited, accurate and insightful news will remain — and will always have value greater than the rapid-fire world of sickening clickbait run rampant on social media.
