Or something like that. Whatever.
Scholars, critics and viewers have noted that some TV newscasts can be momentarily mistaken for Victoria’s Secret specials. In an apparent attempt to capture channel-surfing male viewers, stations have hired attractive female anchors, often outfitting them in attire that emphasizes their sexuality.It goes on to discuss a study where the same young lady was dressed to kill for one "newscast" and dressed down for another. Shockingly, men ogled her when she was looking hot and thus retained a bit less less information.
This strategy may boost the ratings, but in terms of the programs’ purported purpose — informing the public — recent research suggests it has a definite down side. Males may be drawn to those alluring anchors, but they may not remember what they were talking about.
Two Indiana University scholars report that, for male viewers, “emphasis on the sexual attractiveness of female news anchors distracts from memory formation for news content.” They found that “men’s cognitive mechanisms favored visual over verbal processing,” which is a delicate way of saying their focus — and subsequent memory — are more on the broadcaster’s appearance than on the material she was delivering.
Sure, but they no doubt retained the more important mental images, which always come in handy for future reference. Needless to say, this cues up the requisite cheap shot at Fox.
This problem did not turn up in women in this study — but then again, they weren’t responding to newscasts featuring muscular male models. While the results of that scenario are speculative, this paper offers one more reason why Fox News viewers are so ill-informed on so many issues. I mean, have you seen those photos of Megyn Kelly?Of course they overlook the fact Megyn Kelly is more intelligent than most any woman delivering news today and yes, believe it or not, she keeps us informed. By the way, they unwittingly point out regardless of how the woman appeared, men still retained more information. Oops.
Looking at the data a different way, when the anchor had a desexualized appearance, men retained more of the information she presented than women. But when she was dolled up, the men’s retention level dropped to the point where the two genders retained the same amount of content.But hey, when you need to take a poke at Fox, why bother really analyzing the data?