theguardian.com
News Alert Fatigue: Excessive Notifications Cause User Disengagement
A Reuters Institute study reveals that excessive news alerts are causing "alert fatigue", with some users receiving up to 50 daily notifications, leading to users disabling alerts and publishers walking a tightrope between informing and overwhelming their audience.
- What is the primary impact of the increasing prevalence of news alerts on mobile phone users?
- A Reuters Institute study reveals that excessive news alerts are causing "alert fatigue", with some users receiving up to 50 notifications daily. This is driven by news aggregators sending multiple alerts for the same story and a significant portion of users (43%) disabling alerts due to overuse. The study highlights a range of alert frequencies across different news publishers, from a few per day to over 50.
- How do the practices of different news publishers regarding alert frequency vary, and what are the consequences of these variations?
- The overuse of news alerts is linked to user news avoidance, as constant notifications create distractions throughout the day. Publishers are caught in a difficult balancing act, aiming to inform users while avoiding overwhelming them and causing app uninstallation. Collective action is crucial, as the overabundance of alerts from some publishers harms the entire news industry.
- What are the potential long-term effects of alert fatigue on the news industry, and how might technology platforms respond to this issue?
- The battle for smartphone lock screen attention is intensifying competition among news outlets, social media, and other apps. Publishers risk losing users by sending too many notifications. Future restrictions or mediation of news alerts by Apple and Google are potential consequences of this oversaturation, impacting the way news organizations engage with their audiences.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article frames news alerts predominantly negatively, highlighting the problem of alert fatigue and the potential for publishers to lose users. While it acknowledges that publishers are trying to strike a balance, the negative consequences are given more emphasis and prominence. The headline could be framed more neutrally to reflect this.
Language Bias
The language used is largely neutral, although terms like "peppered" and "spoiling the party" carry slightly negative connotations. The article could benefit from more precise language to enhance objectivity.
Bias by Omission
The analysis focuses primarily on the negative impacts of news alerts, neglecting potential benefits such as timely access to critical information. It mentions that some users find alerts useful, but doesn't explore this perspective in depth. The positive aspects of news alerts, such as their role in disseminating important information quickly, are underrepresented.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a somewhat false dichotomy by framing the issue as a choice between too many alerts leading to alert fatigue versus no alerts at all. It doesn't fully explore the possibility of finding a balance or using alert settings to manage notification frequency.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article highlights the negative impact of excessive news alerts on users, leading to alert fatigue and potentially contributing to unsustainable consumption of information. The overuse of push notifications is wasteful and contributes to digital clutter. Users disabling alerts shows a direct response to this unsustainable practice.