Balkinization  

Tuesday, June 28, 2005

Recent Public Opinion: Distrusting (Yet Still Liking) the Media

Anonymous

An interesting survey was just released from Pew Research Center of public opinion about the media:

Public attitudes toward the press, which have been on a downward track for years, have become more negative in several key areas. Growing numbers of people question the news media's patriotism and fairness. Perceptions of political bias also have risen over the past two years.

Public attitudes toward the press, which have been on a downward track for years, have become more negative in several key areas. Growing numbers of people question the news media's patriotism and fairness. Perceptions of political bias also have risen over the past two years. Yet despite these criticisms, most Americans continue to say that they like mainstream news outlets. By wide margins, more Americans give favorable than unfavorable ratings to their daily newspaper (80%-20%), local TV news (79%-21%), and cable TV news networks (79%-21%), among those able to rate these organizations. The margin is only slightly smaller for network TV news (75%-25%).


A very interesting result is that the public increasingly distrusts the media yet still views it favorably:
The gap is most striking between the public's evaluations of the credibility, and favorability, of their daily newspapers. The percentage saying they can believe most of what they read in their daily newspaper dropped from 84% in 1985 to 54% in 2004. But the number expressing a favorable opinion of their daily newspaper, based on those familiar enough to give a rating, declined just eight points over the same period (from 88% to 80%). For both network and local TV news, the patterns are similar though somewhat less dramatic. More people feel favorably toward these media organizations than say they can believe what they read, see and hear from these outlets.

For both network and local TV news, the patterns are similar though somewhat less dramatic. More people feel favorably toward these media organizations than say they can believe what they read, see and hear from these outlets.

What conclusions can be drawn from these trends? One conclusion is an ominous one -- that the public doesn't use credibility as a major factor in analyzing media performance. After all, if the media still receives high favorability ratings in spite of declining credibility, then this shows that credibility is not tied much to favorability. Shouldn't there be a better connection? It would seem to me that credibility is a critical component of what the media should be all about. People should expect credibility, and if they're not getting it, they should not still be liking the media.

Another conclusion is an optimistic one. Perhaps this means that the public is watching the news with a healthier skepticism; people are less willing to take whatever is reported in the news as the truth. And a healthy skepticism is a good thing, right? To some extent, yes, but what if this skepticism increasingly means that people are just dismissing facts that run against their ideologies and partisan interests?

Pew commentary by Tom Rosenstiel and Bill Kovach doesn't offer any great insight into this issue, but it does discuss the growing influence of blogs in a way that strikes me as very apt:
A majority of online news consumers now report that they visit blogs or online news columns. Yet nearly half of all Americans still have a scant notion of what blogs are, and less than a third recognize them as mostly a place for opinion and ideas.

Since consumer expectations about blogs are still being shaped, in other words, the blogosphere is nowhere near fully formed. This is an arena where traditional media still have a significant opportunity to distinguish themselves. And commerce, or the demand of making a profit online, is likely to change the nature of blogs in time more than its proponents expect. Consider that in the late 1920s, radio was still predicted to be largely a medium for education and public safety. . . .

The ratings data about where people are going online reinforce this. The traditional news brands with their traditional news values dominate. Blogs and alternative forms of information and debate are growing. But they are not replacing traditional news. They are growing up alongside the old journalism of verification, with its emphasis on substantiating facts, on independence, on scrutiny of those in power. People increasingly want both. And the evidence suggests the audience is not splintering over this. The same consumer who visits blogs also visits traditional news sites, but for different reasons.

Comments:

depending on how accurate your rendition of the actual poll questions is, the disconnect may be explained by two phenomena.

much news has come to be based on interviews. if "can believe most of what they read in their daily newspaper" is reasonably accurate, perhaps the lack of credibility reflects distrust not of the media and the reporters, ie interviwers, but of the interviewees - appropriately IMO, especially if they are in any controversial arena. honesty in debate has taken a horrific beating in recent years.

similarly, "they like mainstream news outlets" suggests popularity, not trust. as "news" has moved closer to mere entertainment, especially on cable and talk radio, this may not be inconsistent with a loss of credibility. I "like" Law&Order, but I don't "believe" it.
 

Post a Comment

Older Posts
Newer Posts
Home