Hot Air Mobile
Home The Vault Gear About
Hot Air -- get your fill


Zogby: Americans dissatisfied with war coverage

posted at 8:30 am on May 23, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly

Poynter commissioned a poll by Zogby to determine how Americans view the coverage of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the news isn’t good for the American media. While 75% of the public feels well-informed, only 18% of them feel the American media have done a good job in providing that information. What’s missing? All the news that doesn’t bleed:

A new study commissioned by The Poynter Institute to learn more about Americans’ views on Iraq war coverage reveals that of the 8,683 adults surveyed earlier this month, 75 percent feel well-informed. But the majority of readers, viewers and listeners say they are still far from satisfied with the coverage.

Among participants of the online survey, conducted by Zogby International, 47 percent described the coverage as “poor” and 33 percent rated it “fair.” About 16 percent called it “good,” while 2 percent regarded it as “excellent.” Of those surveyed, 90 percent describe themselves as active consumers of news. …

The study reveals a deep dissatisfaction with war coverage and provides information journalists can use to learn more about what the public wants.

The survey, which was funded by the McCormick Foundation, provides a breakdown of the war-related topics participants consider “very important.” Three-quarters consider coverage about stateside medical care of veterans very important. Fifty-six percent said stories on post traumatic stress disorder were very important. Participants also considered medical care the topic they have read and heard about most, followed by post traumatic stress disorder and the war’s economic impact.

What stories have the mainstream media missed that their consumer want to read and see? Positive and localized stories. According to the survey, the top stories that the media have mostly missed are:

  • Information about the Iraqi government
  • Stories about the Iraqi people
  • Stories about returning soldiers

Poynter says that these results reflect a “tension” between media outlets and their consumers, but an 18% positive rating hardly qualifies as “tension”; it’s a collapse. To give an example, George Bush has higher ratings than the media for the war coverage. Congress has higher ratings. The media loves to obsess on those numbers, but somehow neglects to apply a little introspection on their editorial decisions.

And guess what came in last on stories the public wants more focus: casualty reports. This will come as a shock to the AP, which has spent the last several weeks churning death counts on a daily basis for the wire services. Every time an American soldier dies, the AP puts the new count into a headline. Newspapers have ignored this for the most part; perhaps they had already sensed that readers dislike this coverage.

The data has reopened the question of investment in foreign coverage. Media outlets mostly closed down their Iraq bureaus, but the sharp disapproval may have them reconsidering that decision. As the conflict settles down in Iraq, foreign journalists may find it easier to operate bureaus in and out of the Green Zone anyway — and their consumers can finally get the balanced perspective they seek.


Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages:

The Penultimate irony: An Anti-American/Anti-War/Pro-Jihadi Leftist MSM Pollster, such as John Zogby, doing a “Poll” on the War Coverage!

You’ve got to be kidding me?

He and his brother are so far in the tank for the Jihadis, it isn’t even funny.

The last time he issued an accurate poll, was when he predicted Jimmy Carter would win re-election in a landslide……Oh yeah, that DIDN’T HAPPEN, just like all of Zogby’s other polls…

Dale in Atlanta on May 23, 2008 at 8:43 AM

If Zogby is involved this explains the high number – it just couldn’t really be as high as 18%.

OldEnglish on May 23, 2008 at 8:52 AM

The great failure of this President is his inability to circumvent the media, a la the great communicator. But then again the media have gotten craftier in their choice of stories to cover and can completely ignore what doesn’t fit their bias.

I had an exchange with a guy on our local papers blog who clams to be up to date on current events but gets it wrong on just about every point he tried to make. But he truly believes what he says because he read it in the papers.
DKK

LifeTrek on May 23, 2008 at 8:54 AM

Like Congress’ ratings under Reid and Pelosi, the media gets nailed here both from the right and the left, which sinks their ratings even more than would normally be expected.

We know what conservative complaints about the coverage are, but with the left, which is mad at Congress for not ordering U.S. troops to bug out last spring, they actually believe there haven’t been enough stories about this being either a quagmire or a war strictly for oil, or that there hasn’t been more coverage of abuses by the American military. So when the press does show restraint, for example in not obsession on the shot Koran story the way they did the bogus flushed Gitmo Koran or with Abu Ghrab, thst makes the left think the media’s part of Bush’s cabal and the VRWC.

jon1979 on May 23, 2008 at 8:54 AM

Like Congress’ ratings under Reid and Pelosi,

That brings up another point, how is it that the media (other then some on Fox) aren’t hammering Congress for their 30 years of energy obstruction. I honestly believe that if American knew how much oil, coal, and natural gas was off limits they would tar and feather every Congressman that prevented us from using it.

As an aside, this economy is another spun story — just consider how well the underlying economy has to be to absorb today’s fuel costs.
DKK

LifeTrek on May 23, 2008 at 8:59 AM

Among participants of the online survey, conducted by Zogby International, 47 percent described the coverage as “poor” and 33 percent rated it “fair.” About 16 percent called it “good,” while 2 percent regarded it as “excellent.”

fogw on May 23, 2008 at 9:01 AM

This is why the “non-traditional” sources are so important. I would never have known about the 500+ chemical artillery shells found in Iraq if it wasn’t for Michelle Malkin and Ed Morrissey. Reports by people such as Micael Yon cannot be ignored. The MSM needs to drop their personal agendas and get back to meaningful journalism.

DAT60A3 on May 23, 2008 at 9:01 AM

No doubt this will be the top story on the networks tonight.

JammieWearingFool on May 23, 2008 at 9:05 AM

Among participants of the online survey, conducted by Zogby International, 47 percent described the coverage as “poor” and 33 percent rated it “fair.” About 16 percent called it “good,” while 2 percent regarded it as “excellent.”

What are the odds that 2% of the 8,683 people surveyed would turn out to be journalists? Freaky Deaky.

(sorry for the earlier post …. caffeine fingers)

fogw on May 23, 2008 at 9:06 AM

Without the multiple sources available on the internet, we would still be absorbing the lies and mistruths that have brainwashed the masses through the mainstream media. They are still spewing the same garbage they have always spewed, but now with the internet we have a way of determining for ourselves what the truth is rather than have it decided by unknown source with an agenda. A perfect example is the New York Times. Their lies and innuendos are not as readily accepted as they were in the “good ole days.”

volsense on May 23, 2008 at 9:12 AM

94% of those polled are on a first name basis with Dana Perino. 87% of them think Perino is a house n____r for the worst president in the history of presidenting.

snaggletoothie on May 23, 2008 at 9:13 AM

What war coverage?

Bicyea on May 23, 2008 at 9:14 AM

That brings up another point, how is it that the media (other then some on Fox) aren’t hammering Congress for their 30 years of energy obstruction. I honestly believe that if American knew how much oil, coal, and natural gas was off limits they would tar and feather every Congressman that prevented us from using it.

As an aside, this economy is another spun story — just consider how well the underlying economy has to be to absorb today’s fuel costs.
DKK

LifeTrek on May 23, 2008 at 8:59 AM

I think it is rediculous the way congress is treating the oil people. I think “big oil” should invest in some commercials. They should explain to the American people just exactly how obstructive congress has been about exploration, drilling in our own country for the oil and natural resources we have and ask the American people to contact their Congressmen & Senators and demand they stop obstucting the progress of this country!

kcd on May 23, 2008 at 9:22 AM

Not to worry. Media’s favorability ratings will improve once the Fairness Doctrine is restored. It’s just that right wing talk radio that keeps people stirred up.

petefrt on May 23, 2008 at 9:25 AM

I have said all along that the MSM has been saving that side of the war coverage for what they thought would be a Hillary presidency.

Soon after taking office having spread the gospel that her iron handed criticism of Bush and the military had forced changes over the preceding few years the fruits of that criticism were now evident. Every night the casualty count would be replaced with new schools, hospitals, women’s rights, electrification, water treatment plants, etc, etc, etc. All due to Hillary’s handling of the war.

While I am thankful for the blogisphere I never let myself forget that the MSM still controls the most powerful part of the message, the nightly news videos and virtually all the editorial pages. Combine that with the Dems and the miracle is that the repubs have had the White House 28 of the last 40 years.

patrick neid on May 23, 2008 at 9:33 AM

I am very angry at Matt Drudge and the Drudge Report. This is a web site that all the news junkies read and many read as their main source of news. The cable news outlets follow whatever Drudge is running.

Where has Drudge covered the Iraq war positively? The last positive story was years ago.

The Drudge Report is harder left than the New York Times when it comes to the Iraq war.

Why doesn’t America understand that we are winning the war? Because they haven’t heard or read the latest news? Why not? Becuase Drudge hasn’t covered any real news from Iraq for years.

Hey Drudge! It’s not 2004 anymore. We are winning this thing. Post the real news once in a while.

indythinker on May 23, 2008 at 9:38 AM

Excerpt from an e-mail making the rounds. The author is “Tonight Show” host Jay Leno, no fan of Bush:

“Did you hear how bad the President is on the news or a
talk show? Did this news affect you so much, make you
so unhappy you couldn’t take a look around for
yourself and see all the good things and be glad?

Think about it……are you upset at the President
because he actually caused you personal pain, OR is it
because the ‘Media’ told you he was failing to kiss
your sorry, ungrateful behind every day. Make no
mistake about it.

The troops in Iraq and Afghanistan have volunteered to
serve, and in many cases may have died for your
freedom. There is currently no draft in this country.
They didn’t have to go. They are able to refuse to go
and end up with either a ‘general’ discharge, an
‘other than honorable’ discharge or, worst case
scenario, a ”dishonorable” discharge after a few
days in the brig.

So why then the flat-out discontentment in the minds
of 69 percent of Americans?

Say what you want, but I blame it on the Media. If it
bleeds, it leads, and they specialize in bad news.
Everybody will watch a car crash with blood and guts.
How many will watch kids selling lemonade at the
corner?

The Media knows this and Media outlets are
“for-profit” corporations. They offer what sells, and
when criticized, try to defend their actions by
‘justifying’ themselves in one way or another. Just
ask why they tried to allow a murderer like O.J.
Simpson to write a book about how he didn’t kill his
wife, but if he did he would have done it this
way……Insane!

Turn off the TV, burn Newsweek, and use the New York
Times for the bottom of your bird cage. Then start
being grateful for all we have in this country. There
is exponentially more good than bad! We are among the
most blessed people on Earth and should thank God
several times a day, or at least be thankful and
appreciative.’ ‘With hurricanes, tornados, fires out
of control, mud slides, flooding, severe thunderstorms
tearing up the country from one end to another, and
with the threat of bird flu and terrorist attacks,
‘Are we sure this is a good time to take God out of
the Pledge of Allegiance?’ “

Del Dolemonte on May 23, 2008 at 9:51 AM

What war coverage? We see more protesters than soldiers. We hear from NO soldiers who support the war. Apparently, the only politicians who openly and forcefully support the war are GW, McCain, and Joe the Independent. I’ve given up informing the uninformed who watch the networks. They own the great unwashed and they can have them. Controlling ignorant people is no way to start a movement.

Angry Dumbo on May 23, 2008 at 9:56 AM

The media’s position on reporting the war: Good news = bad. Bad news = good, and the left wing jackasses are so blatantly transparent. The best approach is to completely ignore these commercial voyeurs and the entire gaggle of “C” average journalist majors that publish this garbage.

rplat on May 23, 2008 at 10:10 AM

And what is missing from the analysis of poll? 75% felt well informed but they failed to mention where the people were getting their information. How can that large of a percentage feel well informed but then go on to criticize the coverage provided?
Gee you think they might me getting their information from the web and blogs?
Nahhh.
Of course the stated goal of this poll was to judge the wars impact at home, so I seriously doubt if they asked where the poll takers got their information concerning the actual war from, but rather tailored their questions to issues that the pollster thought were important on the homefront.

Just A Grunt on May 23, 2008 at 10:25 AM

The great failure of this President is his inability to circumvent the media, a la the great communicator. But then again the media have gotten craftier in their choice of stories to cover and can completely ignore what doesn’t fit their bias.

LifeTrek on May 23, 2008 at 8:54 AM

Good post.
Bush’s weak point was not going to the public, and that speaks to his poor communication skills.
Reagan’s weekly address was full of humor, and serious stuff, it made news because it was entertaining and informative.
And people liked that he by-passed the MSM, and asked the people to support him. He asked for our help, and we helped.

right2bright on May 23, 2008 at 10:27 AM

That brings up another point, how is it that the media (other then some on Fox) aren’t hammering Congress for their 30 years of energy obstruction.

LifeTrek on May 23, 2008 at 8:59 AM

Another good post.
Because their is no leadership in the Republican party. No one is setting an agenda.
This is the talking points for all Republicans; when being interviewed weave into it the 30 year obstruction of the democrats of the energy program. Every time they are interviewed.
But that is never said, never organized, we have no real leader. It is every man for himself.

right2bright on May 23, 2008 at 10:31 AM

Del,

I wish Leno had said that. It’s an Urban Legend.

patrick neid on May 23, 2008 at 10:45 AM

Be careful about drawing conclusions based on Zogby’s online polling operation, Ed. The last time I looked at it, their methodology was suspect. With Zogby, if you can’t examine the questionnaire and see the sampling methodology for yourself, I would give it very large error bars… or ignore it entirely.

Harris Interactive has an online polling methodology that is much more rigorous. It still raises question marks, but it is well regarded in the public polling industry.

blueguitarbob on May 23, 2008 at 11:01 AM

How come no one in this poll was interested in sotries of American victories?

Iblis on May 23, 2008 at 11:17 AM

The MSM is just like Hollywood in this respect. Both sit around scratching their heads unable to figure out why no one wants to read/watch their Iraq stories. Are these people so dense that they don’t know good news or good guy stories sell? Or are they so committed to their own narratives about evil America and defeat that they can not possibly stomach the positive angle?

NotCoach on May 23, 2008 at 11:27 AM

I think the media coverage of the war has been abysmal on the whole – largely because it is such a consistent non-story and receives virtually no attention.

The notion that this is a “boring war” has taken hold and what little coverage we do get is not detailed enough for the American public to grasp the complexities of it.

PaulD on May 23, 2008 at 11:40 AM

Thank god that there is more then one place to get good reporting. If this happen 20 years ago the liberal would have won.

The liberal reporting on the war at best is piss poor reporting at worst out right lied.

jdun on May 23, 2008 at 11:50 AM

With Zogby, if you can’t examine the questionnaire and see the sampling methodology for yourself, I would give it very large error bars… or ignore it entirely.
blueguitarbob on May 23, 2008 at 11:01 AM

Even Zogby’s OWN WEBSITE doesn’t include that information. If anything, their articles are as unscientific and sloppy as what you see reported on the alphabet TV news.

How come no one in this poll was interested in sotries of American victories?
Iblis on May 23, 2008 at 11:17 AM

That question was not asked.

logis on May 23, 2008 at 11:51 AM

Sure, the media’s approval ratings are low, but they won’t change; they are “speaking truth to power” and “stickin’ it to The Man.” Unfortunately for them, The Man is their readers and viewers, and they are leaving in droves.

PattyJ on May 23, 2008 at 12:13 PM

The media cover wars like they cover a multi-car pileup. In general, they’re interested in the blood and twisted metal, but not the strategy, tactics, logistics, or politics. And they’re not particularly interested in improving their coverage, because they don’t want to ‘normalize’ war by making it sound rational, or even learning how it’s supposed to work. War is an aberration to them, something to be acknowledged only in the negative.

Socratease on May 23, 2008 at 1:17 PM

All we have is whorereporters and whorerespondents, male and female, in the tank for Obama and the liberals. Their ratings are similar to the ones for congress, how fitting.

With the liberty the media have it would be great if they could be scrutinized as rigorously as they do others. Oh, the maggots we’d uncover.

Entelechy on May 23, 2008 at 1:36 PM

Because their is no leadership in the Republican party. No one is setting an agenda.
This is the talking points for all Republicans; when being interviewed weave into it the 30 year obstruction of the democrats of the energy program. Every time they are interviewed.
But that is never said, never organized, we have no real leader. It is every man for himself.

right2bright on May 23, 2008 at 10:31 AM

Right on the mark!
DKK

LifeTrek on May 23, 2008 at 4:30 PM

Is it possible that the MSMedia is finally realizing that it’s out of touch with the American people? Or is it just that they are discovering that the American people are out of touch with the Media?

njcommuter on May 23, 2008 at 7:39 PM

So, the MSM rely on polls to tell them what they should be covering instead of using real journalism and integrity.

Egfrow on May 23, 2008 at 8:48 PM

Comment pages:


You must be logged in to post a comment.