Effects of Audience Feedback on Radio and Television Programmes in Lagos State, Nigeria
|Author(s)||by Oluwole Folaranmi Alabi|
|Keywords||Audience, feedback,broadcast stations, broadcast programmes, broadcasters|
|Open Access||Access PDF Open in New Tab|
In the past, radio and television were regarded as unidirectional media in Nigeria. The facts apparent in history show that there were no direct channels of feedback from the audience. However, modern advances in information and communication technology have changed the old template. Radio and television stations can now know their audience spread while feeling their pulses at the same time. This study x-rayed such feedback channels, pattern of usage among radio and television stations in Lagos state Nigeria, and the extent to which such feedbacks are being incorporated in programmes and what effect. The study employed survey research approach. Broadcasters in all radio and television stations in Lagos state constituted the target population. There are twenty eight (28) radio stations (eight public and twenty private), twenty- one television stations (four public and seventeen private stations). Six radio stations (two public and four private stations) were selected while four television (two public and two private) stations were selected for participation in the study. Audience Feedback Survey Instrument (AFSI) was administered on all broadcasters in the selected stations. AFSI was developed and validated. Using Cronbach alpha, the instrument yielded r= 0.79 as reliability co-efficient. Data generated were analyzed with simple descriptive statistics of frequency count and percentage, cross tabulation, and; regression analysis. Findings show a range of feedback channels available to broadcast stations in Lagos with text message, phone-in-programmes, social media and; e-mail mostly used. Findings show that television stations, more than radio stations, public broadcast stations more than private stations use feedbacks from these channels to improve subsequent programmes. The study recommends that both private and public broadcast stations should pay more attention to feedback from audience and that private stations should do more in the area of incorporating audiences‟ feedbacks into their programmes in order to enhance efficiency and engender audiences‟ confidence.
ARTICLE PROCESSING CHARGE
Online Publication & Two Hard Copies
|International Journal of Empirical Finance||$ 100||$ 170|
|International Journal of Financial Economics||$ 80||$ 150|
|International Journal of Management Sciences||$ 100||$ 170|
|Journal of Empirical Economics||$ 80||$ 150|
|Journal of Education and Literature||$ 60||$ 130|
|Quarterly Journal of Business Studies||$ 50||$ 120|
|Journal of Language and Communication||$ 30||$ 100|
|Studies in Social Sciences and Humanities||$ 80||$ 150|
|Journal of Social Economics||$ 30||$ 100|
|International Journal of Financial Markets||$ 30||$ 100|
|Journal of Public Policy & Governance||$ 30||$ 100|
For a peer-reviewed journal, the publication of articles plays an essential role in the development of a coherent network of knowledge. It is, therefore, essential that all publishers, editors, authors, and reviewers, in the process of publishing the journals, conduct themselves in accordance with the highest level of professional ethics and standards. The publisher is dedicated to supporting the vast efforts of the editors, the academic contributions of authors, and the respected volunteer work undertaken by reviewers. The publisher is also responsible for ensuring that the publication system works smoothly, and that ethical guidelines are applied to assist the editor, author, and reviewer in performing their ethical duties.
The editor has the following responsibilities:
1.The editor should acknowledge receipt of submitted manuscripts within two working days of receipt and ensure an efficient, fair, and timely review process.
2.The editor should ensure that submitted manuscripts are processed in a confidential manner, and that no content of the manuscripts will be disclosed to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
3.The editor should recuse himself or herself from processing manuscripts if he or she has any conflict of interest with any of the authors or institutions related to the manuscripts.
4.The editor should not disclose the names and other details of the reviewers to a third party without the permission of the reviewers.
5.The editor has the right to make the final decision on whether to accept or reject a manuscript with reference to the significance, originality, and clarity of the manuscript and its relevance to the journal.
6.The editor should by no means make any effort to oblige the authors to cite his or her journal either as an implied or explicit condition of accepting their manuscripts for publication.
7.The editor should not use for his or her own research any part of any data or work reported in submitted and as yet unpublished articles.
8.The editor should respond promptly and take reasonable measures when an ethical complaint occurs concerning a submitted manuscript or a published paper, and the editor should immediately contact and consult with the author. In this case, a written formal retraction or correction may also be required.