How Can Social and Mainstream Media Be Managed in a Debate for Balance

1. Introduction

Until a few decades ago, mainstream news media—Newspapers, Magazines, Radio and Television—were the major channels of data dissemination and mass-mediated messages, with trained professional journalists serving exclusively as disseminators of news and information. This exclusivity enjoyed past the mainstream media and professional journalists, however, came to a halt with the inflow new media technologies (Bruns et al., 2012). News and information, which hitherto, reached the public only afterward undergoing professional scrutiny and careful gatekeeping, now, accomplish the public within seconds of happening as a result of the ubiquity of the Internet (Jurrat, 2011). Armed with internet-continued devices, ordinary citizens who were predominantly media consumers became active creators of media contents (Bowman & Willis, 2003). These journalistic endeavours undertaken past not-professionals have been termed "denizen journalism" and the platforms through which these contents are disseminated are referred to as digital media, online media, or new media (Bowman & Willis, 2003; Cartel, 2011).

With the arrival of digital media came an influx of user-generated contents which seem to compete with contents from the mainstream media (Jack, 2010), in terms of speed of dissemination, ease of accessibility and ubiquity of utilize. Likewise, the bottom-up and interactive nature of the online media seems to challenge the acme-down and hegemonic construction of the conventional media (Kramp, 2015). These variations in nature, structure and practice of digital media and mainstream media take generated a wide array of interest and concerns amongst different populations of the society. While media practitioners are locked in a debate nearly the ethics and professionalism of these media platforms (Smashing, 2007), media consumers are concerned most the actuality of the limitless data emanating daily from these media platforms (Banda, 2010). The flood of information generated daily past both mainstream and digital media, especially in the Nigerian media sphere, has left doubts in the minds of the Nigerian audience as to the authenticity of these data and the reliability of the media platforms that generate them. With the rapid advances in new media technologies, ascension of partisan reporting and rampant presence of fake news, the need to investigate public perception of media credibility has assumed new social relevance and historical urgency.

The divergent views about the professional practice of journalism in mainstream media and digital media, as well as the perception of the credibility of data disseminated by these 2 media platforms accept been the focus of many media and communication researchers. Over the years, empirical investigations about audition perception of the credibility and professionalism of mainstream media and digital media have yielded confounding results as some reveal that digital media are perceived as more than apparent (Johnson & Kaye, 1998; Wilson et al., 2011), while others reveal the opposite (Kiousis, 2001; Kovaic et al., 2010; Mehrabi et al., 2009). Other researchers have explored the possible association between audition exposure to the media and their perception of media brownie and trustworthiness (Tsfati, 2010; Tsfati & Cappella, 2005; William, 2012).

Although previous inquiry established a correlation between media exposure and perception of credibility, little scholarly attention has been paid to how information preference might influence media credibility judgements and perception of news and information on mainstream and digital media. The aim of this paper, therefore, is to contribute to this inquiry area by investigating the influence of exposure patterns of the Nigerian audience to both mainstream media and digital media, as well as their information preference on their perception of digital and mainstream media credibility. By examining information preference as a moderator in the relationship between media exposure pattern and perception of media credibility, this paper investigates how data audience prefer to access on both media platforms influence their perception of brownie on both platforms.

one.1. Media exposure and perception of media credibility

Over the years, scholars have empirically tracked trends on public'south opinion nearly the credibility of different media platforms and factors influencing public perception. While before investigations conducted in the pre-net era show that perception of media credibility is majorly influenced by media literacy and demographic factors like; historic period, gender and level of teaching, (Mulder, 1981; Robinson & Kohut, 1988), studies on this subject thing, since the advent of digital media, accept shown that media brownie perception amidst the public are contingent upon factors such equally interpersonal discussion, media employ (Bucy, 2003; Kiousis, 2001), media exposure (Tsfati & Cappella, 2003; Wanta & Hu, 1994), political ideology, and partisanship (Lee, 2010), and religious disposition (Golan & Anita 24-hour interval, 2010).

More than recently, with the multiplicity of media organisations and the proliferation news outlets, the media audience have never been more inundated with numerous choices of media platforms and media contents, resulting in wide-spread skepticism about the authenticity of media platforms and the veracity information they churn out (Banda, 2010). This contempo phenomenon has sparked renewed involvement in media credibility inquiry. Literature suggest that people tend to pay more attending to media platforms they trust and consume media contents that align with their predispositions, while fugitive media they distrust (Kiousis, 2001; Tsfati & Cappella, 2003), affirming the principle of selective exposure.

Exploring the possible associations between mistrust in mainstream news media and consumption of online news, Tsfati (2010), argued that trust in a item medium is associated with exposure to such medium. He found a strong relationship between exposure to mainstream media and trust in the media, while consumption of nonmainstream news was correlated with media skepticsm. William (2012) provided evidence that attention to news correlates with audience trust in message, source, and the media. Similarly, an investigation on the influence of mass media employ on media trust conducted by Hopmann et al. (2015), revealed that the use of specific media types leads to more trust in those media, confirming the findings of earlier studies on the outcome of media exposure on audience trust of the mass media (Kiousis, 2001; Tsfati & Cappella, 2003, 2005; Wanta & Hu, 1994).

While these studies have significantly increased understanding of the influence of media exposure on audience attitude towards the media, in that location is an inconsistency in the operationalization of media trust equally a variable. Many of these studies conceptualized media trust with respect to confidence in and reliance on media platforms, (due east.g. Hopmann et al., 2015; Tsfati, 2010; Tsfati & Cappella, 2003, 2005; William, 2012), while other studies talk over media trust based on perception of accuracy of media coverage (e.one thousand. Kiousis, 2001; Wanta & Hu, 1994). This conceptual irregularity betwixt media trust and media brownie has been a consistent limitation in media brownie research (Hellmueller & Trilling, 2012), resulting in methodological inaccuracies (Guo, 2018).

Although both concepts share some underlying overlaps, evaluations of trust in the media and perception of media brownie are conceptually singled-out. According to Hellmueller and Trilling (2012), trust inquiry depends on the societal functions of the media, while brownie research rely more on interpersonal factors. Guo (2018) further explained that the semantic distinction between both concepts are quite pronounced such that a disregard in usage could distort the measurement of media performance evaluation. The nowadays research distinguishes between the 2 concepts by focusing on audition perception of media credibility. In the context of this written report, media credibility is defined as the evaluation of the believability and reliability of the media based on the accuracy, factuality, fairness, and balance of their content.

1.2. Media credibility research in Nigeria

Evaluations of media credibility and the factors that influence credibility perception have by and large been observed from the perspective of the western audience. The few studies on media brownie in Nigeria accept simply investigated audience assessment of the functioning of different media platforms, yielding differing results. Skepticism about the believability of mass media take been attributed to the ownership pattern of media organizations in the land. On the 1 paw, authorities-owned media are considered as instruments of propaganda (Udeajah, 2004), on the other manus, individual-owned media are accused of serving the interest of their owners (Duyile, 2005). With the emergence of digital media, audience were provided an alternative source of information that rivalled conventional media platforms. Literature, however, suggest that online media platforms are not simply undermining the exclusivity of traditional media in the Nigerian media sphere only are also shifting audience attending away from mainstream media platforms (Dare, 2011).

Consequently, the growing spate of fake news, made news reports and hate speech take called into question the credibility of both mainstream and digital media in the country, prompting a handful of empirical investigations into audience assessment of the brownie of Nigerian mainstream and online media. A study examining the objectivity of news reporting amid online news media in Nigeria, conducted by Akpan et al. (2012) revealed that majority of online news stories are not objectively reported. Another local study conducted past Edogor et al. (2015), investigating the credibility of social media sites, showed that users rate social media platforms equally credible sources of information, with Facebook adjudged as the most credible.

Focusing on audition trust in the mainstream media, Udende et al. (2014) institute out that individual-owned media are more than trusted than those controlled past the government considering land-owned media are perceived as the mouthpiece of the authorities. Adeyanju's (2015) comparative assay of audience assessment of the credibility of social media and the mainstream media approve the findings of earlier studies. He found that social media were rated as more than apparent than mainstream media because of the participatory nature of social media platforms and the ownership influence associated with mainstream media outlets. However, a more contempo cross-national written report by Wasserman and Madrid-Morales (2019) on fake news and media trust in Nigeria, Kenya and South Africa, provide evidence of a pregnant relationship betwixt loftier exposure to disinformation and lower levels of trust in news media beyond all iii African countries.

While these studies provide an understanding about how mainstream media and social media platforms in Nigeria are evaluated, these studies accept overlooked the perceived credibility of other digital media platforms like; online news websites, weblogs and collaborative sites, which too serve as sources of news and information to many Nigerians (Dare, 2011). Furthermore, extant research on media credibility in Nigeria have failed to place some of the underlying factors that might shape people's perception.

1.3. Selective exposure, media characteristics and information preference

The proliferation of mainstream media organisations provide people with the choice of selecting the media that meet their personal needs and the advent of digital media exponentially increased these choices (Bruns et al., 2012). While earliest media studies portray media audience equally passive receivers who are at the mercy of the media and often controlled by media messages, (Katz & Lazarsfeld, 1955), recent scholarships have challenged this previous notion, arguing that the audience are indeed agile consumers who decide the media messages to pay attention to, birthing advice theories similar; uses and gratification and selective exposure theories (Katz et al., 1973). Enquiry applying the uses and gratification approach accept documented the active role the audience members and have provided a basis for understanding the reasons behind audience choice to use the media (Defleur & Ball-Rokeach, 1989).

Literature focusing on selective exposure propose that individuals actively choose the media they utilise and intentionally select media content they pay attention to. The concept of selective exposure which was theoretically grounded by Festinger's (1957) cognitive noise theory, is the assumption that people expose themselves to media content that reinforce their pre-existing beliefs, while avoiding information that negates their pre-existing views. This theory posits that people brand a deliberate effort in selecting and avoiding media platform and media content based on their personal choices and preferences, thus, conferring the ability of choice on media audience rather than the mass media. However, studies have revealed that while audience may be able to consciously attend to data that confirms their pre-existing beliefs, they inadvertently go exposed to bellicose information (Stroud, 2011; Tewksbury et al., 2001; Valentino et al., 2009).

These unintentional and incidental exposure, according to Weeks et al. (2017), provide a stronger motivation for media audience to seek out more mental attitude-reinforcing information. The theory of selective exposure lays emphasis on the selective choices and preferences of individuals. With the numerous media outlets available for information and entertainment, people access online and traditional media platforms for different reasons and purposes, which is determined by their personal choices and preferences (Daramola, 2003). For example, an individual may prefer to access political news content from newspapers or television and choose to become entertainment information from social media sites or weblogs.

Furthermore, the construction and characteristic of both mainstream media and digital media may play a role in the pick of information audience pay attention to on both platforms, which may inadvertently affect their evaluation about the level reliability on both platforms. This miracle is explained by the "medium is the bulletin" theory, a concept coined by Marshall McLuhan (1964) to explain human relationship betwixt the characteristics of the media and how they touch on people's attitudes and experiences. Medium is the message theory assumes that channels of communication "differ not only in terms of their content, only also in regard to how they awaken and alter thoughts and senses … thereby affecting perception" (Gross, 2011, n.a).

Thus, based on the assumptions of the selective exposure and the "medium is the message" theories, this paper argues that judgement well-nigh the reliability of a media platform is to a large extent, determined by audition pre-existing knowledge most the platform'due south mode of operation. This paper also posits that the characteristics of a medium through which information is disseminated are predictive of the way it is perceived by the audience. The following research questions were used to guide the enquiry.

RQ1: What is the exposure pattern of university students to digital news media and mainstream news media?

RQ2: What types of data do university students prefer to access on mainstream media and digital media?

RQ3: What is perception of university students almost the credibility of news and information on mainstream media and on digital media?

RQ4a: To what extent are academy students' evaluations of news and information on mainstream and digital media predicted by their exposure blueprint to both media platforms?

RQ4b: To what extent are university students' evaluations of news and data on mainstream and digital media predicted by their information preference on both media platforms?

2. Methods

A combination of quantitative method, using survey, and qualitative method, using Focus Group Give-and-take (FGD), was employed every bit inquiry design. Data were collected using questionnaire and focus grouping give-and-take guide. While survey data provided us with individual-level stance about the credibility of mainstream and digital media, information from the FGDs helped us sympathise the factors behind respondents' perception nigh the 2 media platforms.

2.1. Sampling

Undergraduates of Academy of Ibadan, Nigeria were chosen as the population of this written report because majority of students in tertiary institutions are technologically savvy, news conscious and are mostly audience and users of digital media and mainstream media. Cluster probability sampling technique was used to randomly select the three faculties and the six departments in the university from where the final participants were selected. Next, purposive sampling was used to select a final sample size of (north = 264) across the randomly selected departments. For the survey, (n = 240) respondents were purposively selected across the six selected departments. Ten (10) respondents were selected from each academic level (commencement year to fourth year), making a total of (north = 40) respondents from each selected department. The pick of selecting 40 respondents from each of the selected departments was informed by the need to give equal chances of participation to all the departments. The completion rate in the survey was 100% with 43.3% male person and 56.7% female respondents. The respondents' ages ranged from xvi to 20 years (37%), 21 to 25 years (46.7%), 26 years and in a higher place (16.3%). For the FGD, four respondents were selected from each randomly selected department—one from each academic level—making a total of (n = 24) respondents who participated in the FGDs. Four discussion sessions consisting of six discussants in each session were conducted. The participants comprised 12 males and 12 females whose ages ranged from xx to 25 years.

2.2. Variable measurement

The independent and dependent variables of this study were measured every bit follows:

Media Exposure: Several items in the questionnaire were used to mensurate the exposure design of respondents to different platforms on both mainstream media and digital media. Respondents were asked the following questions "Do y'all admission news and information from the post-obit mainstream media platforms?" and were provided with the following responses (1 = Newspaper, 2 = Mag, 3 = Radio, 4 = Television); "Practise you access news and data from the following digital media platforms?" and were provided with the following responses (1 = Weblogs, 2 = Social media sites, iii = Online news websites). The frequency of respondents' mainstream and digital media use was also measured by asking them how oftentimes they access news and information from both mainstream and digital media. Response categories ranged from (1 = everyday; 2 = v to vi days a calendar week; 3 = 3 to 4 days a week; 4 = 1 to ii days a week).

Information Preference: To measure the blazon of data respondents prefer to access on both mainstream and digital media, they were get-go asked what type of data they usually access on mainstream and digital media. Response options, which respondents were asked to choose as many as practical to them, are: News, Education, Economy, Politics, Scientific discipline, Wellness, Religion, Sports, Amusement, All types of information. And so, respondents were asked which information they by and large adopt to access on the mainstream media and digital media. Response options, which they were asked to select one, are: News, Education, Economic system, Politics, Scientific discipline, Wellness, Religion, Sports, Amusement.

Media Credibility Perception: Before measuring the perceived credibility of mainstream and digital media, we showtime examined the criteria with which respondents evaluate media credibility by asking them which factors they apply to guess the credibility of news and data. They were told to select as many every bit applicable from the post-obit options (Accuracy, Factual, Comprehensiveness, Fairness, Objectivity, Believability, Timeliness, Trustworthiness, Currency, Residual). Respondents were then asked to rate the credibility of both mainstream and digital media based on the credibility factors they selected. The responses were (one = highly apparent, 2 = fairly credible, 3 = not credible). Adjacent, we measured the perception of respondents about the credibility of news and information on both mainstream and digital media. This was achieved using a ten-detail credibility measurement scale partly adopted from Gaziano and McGrath (1986) credibility scale. The items include the following statements; "News and information on mainstream/digital media are accurate"; "News and information on mainstream/digital media are factual"; "News and data on mainstream/digital media are trustworthy"; "News and information on mainstream media are free of external command". Respondents were asked to indicate their level of agreement or disagreement with each statement on a 5-bespeak Likert calibration (1 = strongly agree, five = strongly disagree). Scores of the credibility factors were summed into a brownie index. The reliability exam for the credibility measurement calibration was (Cronbach's α =.85).

two.three. Information analysis

The survey information were analysed using Pearson correlation analysis. Outset, descriptive statistics was used to ascertain the exposure design of respondents to mainstream and digital media. Next, multiple regression analysis was conducted to examine the human relationship between respondents' media exposure pattern and their perception of mainstream/digital media credibility, as well as to examine the correlation between respondents' information preference and their perception of both media platforms. Responses from the FGD were recorded, transcribed verbatim and reviewed by the start author. Based on the research questions, the transcribed data were thematically analysed; major themes were developed and were coded co-ordinate to cardinal areas of interest.

3. Results

In this section, first, we provide the descriptive statistics tracing the exposure pattern of respondents to the different mainstream and digital media platforms besides equally their information preferences on both media platforms vis a vis the responses for the Focus Group Word. Side by side, nosotros present correlational evidence explaining the relationship between respondents' media exposure blueprint, their information preference, and their evaluations of mainstream and digital media brownie.

3.1. Exposure pattern to mainstream and digital media platforms

Results from the descriptive analysis showed that of all the mainstream media platforms, radio is the nearly used every bit bulk of respondents (88.3%) admission news and information on radio. A large per centum of the respondents (85.4%) also said they access news and data on television, 67.five% noted that they obtain news from newspapers, while 55.eight% affirmed that they exercise get information from magazines. Findings showing the usage of digital media platforms reveal that social media sites are the most used platforms as 92.9% respondents indicated obtaining data from them, 85.4% access news and data from weblogs, while 56.iii% access news and information from online news websites.

Thus, to answer RQ1 which sought to examine the exposure pattern of undergraduate students to mainstream news media and digital news media, findings, as shown in Table 1 reveal that 47.1% of the respondents are frequent users of mainstream media, 17.i% are average users, while 35.8% of respondents are less frequent users of mainstream media. Results besides prove that 52.9% of respondents use digital media oftentimes, 22.5% of respondents are boilerplate users of digital media, while 24.6% of respondents do not use digital media ofttimes. Based on the above result, information technology can be deduced that respondents access news and information on digital media more regularly than they do on mainstream media.

Digital media vs mainstream media: Exploring the influences of media exposure and data preference every bit correlates of media credibility

Published online:

22 Oct 2020

Tabular array i. Frequency of respondents' usage of mainstream and digital media

Similarly, out of the 24 participants who took office in the FGD, merely four (iv) participants affirmed that they regularly access news and data from the mainstream media, while xx (twenty) participants stated that they occasionally access news and data from the mainstream media. I the other mitt, eighteen (xviii) participants affirmed that they obtain news and information from the digital media daily, while the remaining half-dozen participants said that they occasionally access news and information from the mainstream media. This goes to show that majority of the respondent and participants often employ the digital media to admission news and information more than the mainstream media. Furthermore, the responses of participants during the FGD shows that about of the students prefer to admission news and information on digital media because of its like shooting fish in a barrel accessibility, its affordability, its timeliness, and currency of information dissemination. However, those who prefer to access news and information on mainstream media highlighted professionalism, authenticity, and reliability as the reasons for their preference.

three.2. Information preference of respondents on mainstream and digital media

Findings show that virtually all the respondents (98.3%) admission all types of information on both mainstream media and digital media. However, further exam revealed that respondents' information preference on mainstream media differ from that of digital media. Data, as presented in Table 2 shows that News (55.4%) is the most preferred type of data respondents access on mainstream media, while Amusement (xiv.two%) comes 2d as the most preferred data on mainstream media, while political information (9.six%) comes 3rd. However, the remaining 10% prefer to get other types of data on mainstream media. Findings farther show that contrary to the mainstream media, Entertainment (threescore%) is the most preferred information respondents access on digital media, while News (17.v%) comes as second.

Digital media vs mainstream media: Exploring the influences of media exposure and data preference as correlates of media credibility

Published online:

22 October 2020

Table ii. Data preference of respondents on mainstream and digital media

The consequence to a higher place is supported past responses of the FGD participants as 23 of them stated that news is the information they mostly prefer to access on mainstream media, while 18 out of the 24 discussants confirmed that the type of information they mostly adopt to access on the digital media is amusement. From the assay of both quantitative and qualitative data, it can exist inferred that mainstream media is mostly used to access news information, while digital media is mostly accessed to get entertainment information. This shows that fifty-fifty though bulk of the respondents spend more time accessing the digital media, they still plow to the mainstream media for news and important issues. Findings farther reveal that respondents' preference for news on mainstream media and entertainment on digital media is as a result of the differences in nature and features of the 2 media platforms every bit well as the method of dissemination of information on the 2 media platforms. The participants stated that mainstream media are organised and have institutional processes dedicated to disseminating verified data, while the interactive and unstructured nature of digital media is more suited to entertainment and soft news.

iii.3. Credibility perception nigh mainstream and digital media

To answer RQ3, nosotros get-go ascertained the criteria that the respondents used in assessing media credibility. Results evidence that about all the respondents (98.8%) rate credibility of news and information in the mass media based on factors such as: Accuracy, Factual, Comprehensiveness, Fairness, Objectivity, Believability, Timeliness, Trustworthiness, Currency and Balance. Then, an analysis of respondents' evaluations about the credibility of mainstream media platforms and digital media platforms as presented in Effigy one shows that half of the respondents (50.four%) charge per unit mainstream media as highly credible, while less than half of the respondents (20.8%) of the respondents charge per unit digital media as highly apparent. From the above data, it can be inferred that bulk of respondents evaluate mainstream media as more credible than digital media.

Digital media vs mainstream media: Exploring the influences of media exposure and information preference as correlates of media brownie

Published online:

22 October 2020

Figure i. Showing respondents' rating of mainstream media and digital media brownie

Figure 1. Showing respondents' rating of mainstream media and digital media credibility

Digital media vs mainstream media: Exploring the influences of media exposure and data preference as correlates of media credibility

Published online:

22 October 2020

Figure 2. Graphical representation of the relationship between media exposure, information preference and perceived media credibility

Notation: Numbers show statistical relationship where p <.05

Findings from the FGD data corroborate survey results equally 22 discussants opined that mainstream media are more than credible than digital media while but two participants differed. Participants who rated mainstream media as more credible cited the principle of accountability and adherence to journalistic ethics and codes equally some of the reasons for judging mainstream media to be more than credible. One of the participants, a 23-year-onetime 3rd-yr student said " … practitioners of mainstream media don't just written report annihilation that they desire. They consider the lawmaking of behave guiding them but on the digital media, anybody tin can postal service whatever they want without verifying the veracity". On the contrary, two other discussants stated that the interactivity feature of digital media and liberty enjoyed by contributors on digital media make the platform more than credible than mainstream media. They noted that digital media are free of governmental control, hence, they present authentic and objective information while mainstream media serve the interest of their owners. Based on the foregoing, it tin be deduced that University of Ibadan undergraduates consider mainstream media more credible than digital media considering of the professional person nature of mainstream media.

Furthermore, using the previously highlighted brownie factors equally a yardstick for measuring news and information credibility, analysis of respondents' perception well-nigh the brownie of news and information disseminated on both mainstream media and digital media reveals that news and data on mainstream media is considered more credible than that of digital media. Out of a possible mean of l, the overall hateful alphabetize score for news and information credibility on mainstream media is 25.48 (SD = 6.25), indicating that respondents find mainstream media content moderately credible. Results, as presented in Table 3 show that respondents rated accuracy (M = two.87, SD = 1.27); authenticity (Grand = ii.85; SD = 1.08) and trustworthiness (One thousand = 2.73, SD = 1.xix) of news and information the highest, while freedom from control (Thou = 1.76, SD = .85) was rated the lowest. Findings further reveal that news and information on digital media was judged less credible with an overall hateful index score of 21.66 (SD = 4.42). While the freedom from control (M = ii.80, SD = 1.28); unbiased reportage (1000 = 2.75; SD = ane.xx) and currency (M = 2.sixty; SD = ane.08) of data on digital media are rated highest, the accuracy (1000 = 1.65, SD = .78); authenticity (M = one.32, SD = .73) and trustworthiness (Grand = 1.20, SD = .71) of digital media content have low ratings.

Digital media vs mainstream media: Exploring the influences of media exposure and information preference equally correlates of media credibility

Published online:

22 October 2020

Table iii. Means of credibility factors and credibility alphabetize overall (n = 240)

Similarly, 22 discussants opined that news and information on mainstream media are more credible than digital media contents, citing originality, professionalism, actuality, comprehensiveness of mainstream contents, among others equally the reasons for their opinion, although many of the participants were sceptical nearly ownership influence on mainstream media. Co-ordinate to Olamide, a 20-year-onetime second-year pupil, news on mainstream media is more credible because "professional person journalists have time to investigate their stories, and so they are reliable; they don't merely leap into news stories. There is also residue in writing their news reports, although sometimes they may reverberate the owners' bias". Grace, a quaternary-yr student as well added "I feel mainstream media is very credible in terms of currency and timeliness. Only in terms of objectivity, I would give them l% because some news stations may be influenced past their owners". Every bit for their low brownie perception of news and information on digital media, majority of the participants cited unprofessionalism, anonymity, and sensationalism of news reports every bit reasons. Alex, a quaternary-twelvemonth student even so noted that sensationalism of stories is the master reason why he thinks news and information on digital media are less credible. He explained:

Well, I believe news and information on mainstream media as beingness more credible because professional journalists take time to get their data and to get their news out. They work on it and endeavor to get the necessary details. Only for the digital media, I call back citizen journalists but ride on the back of sensationalism to boost traffic to their site. They don't really get the fact; they don't try to get to the root of the matter or verify their information before they just give it out to the audience. They merely give out what they feel is interesting just to heave their ain site.

However, only 2 discussants disagreed with the bulk by stating that digital media contents are more credible than mainstream media contents. They noted that easy accessibility, objectivity, and lack of external influence are reasons why news and data on digital media are more than credible. I of the two discussants, Olatunde, a first-year student explained the reason for his position thus: "To me, news on digital media are more credible because they are not manipulated or falsified unlike mainstream media who sometimes give inaccurate figures especially of victims or causalities in a disaster". Expressing a similar view, Emmanuel, who is in his tertiary yr, stated:

Information on digital media are more apparent considering those that post information there reveal the truth, they betrayal information which might otherwise exist unpublished by the mainstream media. The news on mainstream media is under the control of the government or the media owners who decide on what the public should and should not know.

3.iv. Human relationship betwixt media exposure and perception of mainstream and digital media credibility

A regression analysis conducted to ascertain the human relationship betwixt respondents' exposure pattern to the media and their perception of mainstream media shows a positive significant coefficient (p = .014). With p < .05, exposure to mass media emerged as a positive predictor of perception of mainstream media credibility. Withal, further assay yielded a pregnant negative (p = -.05) relationship between media exposure pattern and perception of digital media credibility (See Figure two), showing that higher exposure to the mass media is associated with lower credibility perception of digital media.

The above findings were supported past qualitative data generated from the FGD. All the 24 discussants affirmed that accessing news and data on both mainstream and digital media greatly influenced how they perceive the credibility of news and information on both media platforms as information technology exposed them to the strengths and limitations of mainstream and digital media, particularly with respect to their nature and fashion of operation. According to the participants, the frequent usage of digital media fabricated them more aware of its editorial porosity, compared to the strict gatekeeping mechanism that is a paramount feature of mainstream media functioning. Furthermore, the discussants noted that high exposure to digital media fabricated them conversant with another peculiarities of the nature of digital media like; the lack of institutional restraints, anonymity of contributors, virality of unverified data, which when compared to mainstream media, skews brownie judgement confronting digital media. For example, ane participant, Samuel, a third-year student said:

I see the way news is reported on TV and newspapers with verifiable sources, which assures me of its trustworthiness. On digital media, however, lots of stories have no sources and those that practise take sources cannot exist verified. This limits my confidence in its reliability.

Thus, these findings indicate that exposure to both media platforms increases awareness to the nature and modus operandi of both platforms which inadvertently contributes to their credibility judgement.

iii.5. Relationship betwixt information preference and perception of mainstream and digital media credibility

A correlation analysis reveals that the human relationship between respondents' data preference and their perception of mainstream and digital media credibility is statistically significant. Results, as presented in Effigy two, shows in that location is a positive association between respondents' data preference on mainstream media and their perception of mainstream media brownie (p = .001). Likewise, findings show a positive significant relationship between information preference on digital media and perception of digital media credibility (p ˂.005).

Analysis of the FGD data reveal that the participants' preference for accessing news on mainstream media and amusement information on digital media is not simply based on the nature and exercise of both media platforms, only also on discussants' pre-existing beliefs almost both media platforms. For example, ane of the participants, Janet, who is in her first yr, said "I would rather go my news from Television set, newspaper or radio because I know they are trained professionals. Merely the unrestricted temper of digital media makes it the best place for me to get juicy gossips". Another discussant, Subomi, a 24-year-old fourth-year student noted:

I know that 90 percent of whatever information I'k getting from the online media could be half-baked because I've always had the belief that real and factual news tin can only be obtained from mainstream media. So, when I see a story online, I still need to continue the mainstream media to verify the information.

4. Discussion

The purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of media exposure and information preference on perception of mainstream and digital media brownie. To examine this relationship, this study get-go, examined the exposure pattern of mainstream and digital media among University of Ibadan undergraduates. The findings reveal that although students ordinarily access news and information on both media platforms, they all the same, use the digital media more frequently than they apply mainstream media. From the focus group discussions, we institute that students access information from mainstream media because of the perceived professionalism, authenticity, and reliability of traditional news platforms. Despite this argument in favour of mainstream media, bulk of students notwithstanding use the digital media more oft than they use the mainstream media. The reason for the preference for digital media, according to the FGD participants is because of the accessibility, affordability, and ubiquity of the platform likewise equally the timeliness and currency of information on digital media. This result, corroborating the findings of Wilson et al. (2011) on mainstream and digital media usage, provides evidence of a growing shift of audition attention from mainstream media and an increasing reliance on digital media equally sources of news and data.

Furthermore, this study revealed that respondents access specific types of information from mainstream media and digital media. Results showed that students apply the digital media majorly to access entertainment data and soft news, while they use the mainstream media to access serious news and to verify information obtained from the digital media. This finding provides further elucidation for the higher exposure pattern to digital media. Given that the participants of this study are young university students, their information preferences lean more towards entertainment and showbiz than to serious news and political bug, hence they are inclined to access digital media more frequently than mainstream media. This event besides supports the assumption of selective exposure theory which proposes that people tend to pay more attention to media messages and media platforms based on their pre-existing beliefs, interests, and preferences (Festinger, 1957). From this finding, it was deduced that participants pay more attention to digital media considering of their preferences for entertainment while all the same accessing mainstream media—albeit less oft—because of their belief that information from traditional news outlets are more reliable.

Consistent with previous research nearly the criteria for evaluating media credibility, this written report establish that students approximate mass media credibility based on factors such as: accuracy, fact, comprehensiveness, fairness, objectivity, believability, timeliness, trustworthiness, currency, balance, and source attribution. Scholars hold that the higher up qualities are what the media—mainstream or digital—should possess equally they are what the audience expect in every news and information (Appleman & Sundar, 2016; Gaziano & McGrath, 1986; Meyer, 1988). Thus, using these highlighted credibility factors as a yardstick for measuring media and media content credibility, information technology was observed that bulk of the participants charge per unit mainstream media and their content as more than credible than digital media and their content. While research investigating audiences' perception virtually the performance of mainstream media and digital media have divergent conclusions, large proportion of these studies provide evidence that people mostly trust mainstream media more than digital media (Kiousis, 2001; Kovaic et al., 2010; Mehrabi et al., 2009). Although the effect of the present written report tilts towards this general direction, it was institute that participants were equally apprehensive about the believability of mainstream media on the grounds of governmental censorship equally well as ownership and advertisers' influence.

The report further revealed that bulk of participants take positive perception about news and data on mainstream media because of their long-held belief that traditional news outlets are organised platforms where trained journalists provide verified information whose sources are properly attributed. The fact-checking and gatekeeping mechanism boosts audiences' conviction in mainstream media. However, this confidence in the reliability of mainstream media is challenged by ownership control of the media, every bit participants expressed dissatisfaction that mainstream media platforms ofttimes serve every bit mouthpieces of their owners, thereby restricting journalistic liberty. On the other mitt, participants' poor perception of digital media is attributed to the informality of news dissemination as well as the anonymity of contributors on digital media space. This anonymity of online contributors is identified as one of the downsides of citizen journalism. Co-ordinate to Jurrat (2011) critics of denizen journalism pointed out that the anonymity of those who post information online makes it difficult to ascertain the truthfulness such information since they cannot be held responsible for their publication.

Examining the association between media exposure and perception of mainstream and digital media credibility, the study constitute that respondents' exposure to mainstream and digital media is predictive of their perception nearly both media platforms. On the one hand, it was observed that at that place was a positive significant human relationship between exposure to mainstream media and perception of mainstream media brownie. On the other mitt, findings showed a negative significant association between exposure to digital media and perception of digital media. This upshot indicates that participants who ofttimes access data on mainstream media, tend to have college perception about the brownie of mainstream media, while those who often use digital media take lower perception about the credibility of digital media. Based on an initial finding that respondents access digital media more ofttimes than mainstream media, information technology was observed that the usage frequency of both media platforms exposed the participants to the nature, characteristics, and features of both platforms, which inadvertently, influenced their evaluations of the performance of both platforms.

Although the in a higher place-stated finding is consequent with previous studies that provide evidence that media exposure relates to audience trust in the media (Kiousis, 2001; Tsfati, 2010; William, 2012), the present written report extends previous observations by providing evidence of cognitive coaction. Information technology was deduced that the constant and frequent exposure to mainstream and digital media made the participants became conversant with the nature, techniques and practices of these two media platforms; and with that, they were able to draw inferences about the credibility of these 2 platforms. This affirms the postulation of Marshall McLuhan's 'Medium is the Message' Theory which states that the mass medium through which data is carried plays a vital role in the style it is perceived (Gross, 2011). Thus, by accessing data on digital media and mainstream media, students were able to decipher and weigh the strengths and limitations of both media platforms.

Furthermore, analysis of the association between information preference and perception of media credibility shows a positive significant relationship, suggesting that the type of data participants access on mainstream media and digital media has an outcome on the fashion they evaluate both platforms, Given that majority of the participants by and large prefer to access news on mainstream media and amusement information on digital media, information technology was further revealed that these preferences are based on participants' beliefs almost both media platforms besides as on the nature of both media platforms. The FGD discussants noted that their preference for news on mainstream media and entertainment on digital media is informed by their belief that mainstream media is organised and professional in nature, while digital media is more informal and less institutional in nature. Thus, it was inferred that this conventionalities contributes to participants' evaluation of the credibility of mainstream and digital media. Hence, it can exist ended that while exposure and information preference did influence students' perception of mainstream and digital media credibility, the nature and characteristics of the two media platforms did contribute to students' brownie perception.

5. Conclusion and recommendations

Although digital media has taken heart phase in the Nigerian media sphere and is competing favourably with mainstream media—every bit evidenced in this report, traditional news outlets remain veritable sources of news and information for many Nigerians. While the higher brownie ratings accorded to mainstream media might be encouraging to mainstream journalists, information technology is however important to annotation the overall mediocre ratings of news and information on both mainstream and digital media, which suggests that there are still major scepticisms about the performances and reliability of both sources of information. Participants highlighted owners' bias and lack of press freedom equally a lapse in mainstream media, while inaccuracy and lack of professional standards were highlighted as some of the shortcomings of digital media. In the light of this, this study recommends the intervention of press regulatory bodies and media accountability systems in ensuring high professional and ethical standards amid mainstream journalists and contributors of user-generated contents on digital media. While this study has been able to answer some questions regarding the credibility perception of Nigerian media, a replication of this study amongst a larger and more heterogeneous population will be helpful to corroborate the findings of this report.

In summary, this study makes a pregnant contribution to media credibility research by increasing the agreement that the frequency of media exposure inadvertently increases audition awareness to the nature and characteristics of the media, which has an effect on their evaluations well-nigh the media. Besides, this study has been able to provide show that audience perception well-nigh a medium is afflicted by their data preference on such medium which is informed by their preexisting behavior and interests, showing that media content affects trust in the media. These results lend support to McLuhan'southward "Medium is the Message" and Festinger'south selective exposure theories.

meyerbeflon1960.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/23311983.2020.1837461

Share this post