TV 뉴스의 앵커제도와 앵커멘트에 관한 방송기자의 인식 연구 = Research on broadcasters' perception on TV news anchor system and anchors' comments

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

TV news anchors play an important role in Korea. But, the support systems for them and their status are unsatisfactory and unstable. Their rights and roles are limited and they are out of the news coverage and editing system. Not much thought has been given to the problems of and possible solutions to the anchor system.
In this regard, this research is designed to take a look at how broadcast journalists perceive anchors' qualifications and requirements, what anchors' roles and rights should be like and how the limited rights of anchors affect their performance. It also attempts to delve into the question of defining the line between anchors and news managers, and explores realistic alternative anchor systems. For that purpose, I surveyed broadcast journalists and extracted result on the following questions.

question 1: How much do broadcast journalists perceive anchors and their comments affect their decisions on news preferences?

They were found to perceive that although anchors and their comments affect news image and news preferences in a not insignificant way, they are not the primary and utmost factors. This may mean there are no prominent differences between anchors.

question 2: How do broadcast journalists perceive anchors' qualifications and requirements should be?

They rated trustworthiness, objectivity, broadcast-appropriate voice, ability to speak impromptu and analyze news, looks, criticality, experience in the field as anchors' most important qualifications and requirements and in that order. But, their satisfaction levels were not that high on the anchor's qualifications and requirements in the news they watch frequently. Particularly, there was a big discrepancy between importance level and satisfaction level on trustworthiness and criticality. It seems to indicate that although trustworthiness is anchors' most important qualification, in reality it falls below expectations. It also indicates that although criticality is not the most required qualification, it is what Korean anchors lack.

question 3: How do broadcast journalists perceive anchors' roles and rights should be?

They perceived that current anchors are closer to 'news reader' or 'news caster'. They, however, did not agree with the view that news anchors should have editing rights as in America. They raised the concern that editorial directions and tone would be adversely affected if anchors have editing rights as well. They were divided between those who thought anchors should have the right to put a final seal on their comments and those who thought it is the right of news managers. They were also divided between those who thought anchors' comments should be subject to news managers approval and those who favor anchors' autonomy. It seems to be the result of the perception that spreading responsibility in the news-making process is a way of safeguarding independence and objectivity of news.

question 4: What do broadcast journalists perceive is the best way to improve on the anchor system?

They suggested specializing news programs and strengthening anchors' roles in news analysis and commentary. Next in the order of importance were making anchor selection process more scientific and objective, institutionalizing anchor training, and enhancing treatment to anchors. Establishing a basis for rights and responsibilities was also perceived to be important, which indicates that there are currently no clear lines defining anchors' roles and rights. This might suggest that when anchors' comments create controversy, there should be a basis for accountability.

On the basis of the research findings, I would like to make following suggestions.
First, anchors' new roles should be explored by attempting a change in news format in such a way that news items be reduced while each item be more in depth.
Second, news programs should be specialized according to each time slot and anchors should be hired based on their specialty.
Third, a serious discussion should be started on who should be responsible for anchors' comments along with a discussion to reach a consensus on what the most appropriate anchor system should be.
Fourth, a separate team should be set up to support anchors.
Fifth, a research should be launched to drastically enhance the treatment of anchors.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 제 1 장 서론 = 1
• 제 1 절 문제 제기 = 1
• 제 2 절 연구 목적 = 4
• 제 3 절 연구 문제 = 6
• 제 2 장 기존 문헌 연구 = 8
• 제 1 절 앵커에 관한 고찰 = 8
• 1. 앵커의 정의 = 8
• 2. 앵커의 자질과 조건 = 10
• 3. 앵커의 선발 절차 = 14
• 4. 앵커의 역할 = 16
• 5. 앵커의 영향력 = 21
• 제 2 절 한국의 앵커제도에 관한 고찰 = 26
• 1. 앵커제도의 도입과 변천 과정 = 26
• 2. 한국 앵커제도의 특성 = 27
• 3. 한국 앵커제도의 한계와 문제점 = 30
• 제 3 절 앵커멘트에 관한 고찰 = 35
• 1. 앵커멘트의 정의 = 35
• 2. 앵커멘트 작성과정 = 37
• 제 3 장 조사 방법 = 39
• 제 1 절 조사 대상과 자료의 수집 = 39
• 제 2 절 조사 도구 = 41
• 1. 설문지의 구성 = 41
• 2. 설문지의 타당성과 신뢰성 = 43
• 제 3 절 자료 처리와 분석 = 47
• 제 4 장 분석 결과 = 49
• 제 1 절 표본의 인구 통계적 특성 = 49
• 제 2 절 뉴스 선호도와 이미지 = 51
• 1. 뉴스 프로그램 선호도 = 51
• 2. 뉴스 프로그램 선호 이유 = 51
• 3. 앵커와 앵커멘트가 뉴스 프로그램 선택에 미치는 영향 = 52
• 4. 뉴스 프로그램 이미지에 영향을 미치는 요인 = 53
• 제 3 절 앵커의 자질과 조건 = 55
• 1. 앵커의 자질과 조건의 중요도와 만족도 = 55
• 2. 앵커의 자질과 조건이 뉴스 이미지에 미치는 영향 = 56
• 제 4 절 앵커의 역할과 권한 = 59
• 1. 앵커의 역할에 대한 평가 = 59
• 2. 앵커와 편집권 = 60
• 3. 앵커와 앵커멘트 = 67
• 제 5 절 앵커제도의 개선 방안 = 77
• 1. 앵커제도의 개선 방안 = 77
• 2. 앵커제도의 개선 방안에 대한 인식 차이 = 78
• 제 5 장 결론과 제언 = 86
• 제 1 절 조사 결과의 요약 = 86
• 제 2 절 결론 = 90
• 1. 앵커와 뉴스 선호도 = 90
• 2. 앵커의 자질과 조건 = 90
• 3. 앵커의 역할과 권한 = 92
• 4. 앵커제도의 개선 방안 = 95
• 제 3 절 제언 = 97
• 참고문헌 = 101
• ABSTRACT = 106
• 부록 = 110