Everyone agrees: the mainstream media is biased, inaccurate
posted at 11:37 am on September 14, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
The newspaper industry has done a lot of griping about the loss of their business model, but perhaps that has more to do with the loss of their credibility than with new technology. The latest survey on news media from Pew Research shows that Americans have the lowest opinion of the mainstream media in the entire time that Pew has polled on the subject. And now Democrats are almost as likely as Republicans to complain about bias in news reporting:
The public’s assessment of the accuracy of news stories is now at its lowest level in more than two decades of Pew Research surveys, and Americans’ views of media bias and independence now match previous lows.
Just 29% of Americans say that news organizations generally get the facts straight, while 63% say that news stories are often inaccurate. In the initial survey in this series about the news media’s performance in 1985, 55% said news stories were accurate while 34% said they were inaccurate. That percentage had fallen sharply by the late 1990s and has remained low over the last decade.
Similarly, only about a quarter (26%) now say that news organizations are careful that their reporting is not politically biased, compared with 60% who say news organizations are politically biased. And the percentages saying that news organizations are independent of powerful people and organizations (20%) or are willing to admit their mistakes (21%) now also match all-time lows.
Republicans continue to be highly critical of the news media in nearly all respects. However, much of the growth in negative attitudes toward the news media over the last two years is driven by increasingly unfavorable evaluations by Democrats. On several measures, Democratic criticism of the news media has grown by double-digits since 2007. Today, most Democrats (59%) say that the reports of news organizations are often inaccurate; just 43% said this two years ago. Democrats are also now more likely than they were in 2007 to identify favoritism in the media: Two-thirds (67%) say the press tends to favor one side rather than to treat all sides fairly, up from 54%. And while just a third of Democrats (33%) say news organizations are “too critical of America,” that reflects a 10-point increase since 2007.
Wow. When you see a ten-point increase among Democrats in complaining that the media has become too critical of the US, you’re spotted a real trend. As for the rest of the higher numbers among Democrats, that could be a natural result of having a Democrat in the White House. The media has to focus on Barack Obama and his policies. Instead of focusing on his happy-talk speeches in the campaign, they are now having to report the lack of effect of his speeches as President, and the increasing unemployment and the big deficit spending from Obama and a Democratic Congress. They’re not going to like that when they hear it.
Pew also polls on each of the major national media organs. Surprisingly, CNN fares best, as even a plurality of Republicans view it favorably. Perhaps just as surprisingly, Fox News — which has been the subject of far-Left derision for years — comes in a close second, with a plurality of Democrats approving of their performance. In the aggregate, though, broadcast network news does best with 64% favorable, and majorities of both Republicans and Democrats approving.
To no one’s surprise, the New York Times fares worst. Only 29% give the paper a favorable rating, with Republicans going 2-1 unfavorable (31%-16%), much worse than the statistical tie the GOP gives on MSNBC (35%-34% unfavorable). Independents, which give all other outlets wide pluralities or majorities for positive assessments, only give the Paper of Record a wan 29%-18% plurality.
The net result? A terrible decline in credibility on news reports. In 1985, 55% of the American people had confidence in the mainstream media to get the facts straight; now it’s merely 29%. Now, 63% say their reports are “often inaccurate,” up from 34% in 1985. Small wonder that the mainstream media now struggle to keep readers and viewers.









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
I’m……shocked. Say it isn’t so.
milwife88 on September 14, 2009 at 11:39 AM
Wow – this will be front page news……..
Vashta.Nerada on September 14, 2009 at 11:40 AM
Somebody pass me a tissue. I’m gettin’ all misty over here.
Nobody trusts the MSM. Boo hoo.
BobMbx on September 14, 2009 at 11:41 AM
What’s the proper term for a meme that doesn’t work? A sheme?
Vashta.Nerada on September 14, 2009 at 11:42 AM
This is propoganda about propoganda.
seven on September 14, 2009 at 11:42 AM
I’m sure their intent is to be accurate, so that makes up for their lack of skills.
BobMbx on September 14, 2009 at 11:43 AM
Democrats don’t like the coverage of Mrs. Obozo’s arms?
txag92 on September 14, 2009 at 11:43 AM
I’m shocked! Shocked I tell you to find out the MSM has a liberal bias! Me and my twitching leg would NEVER had known.
Jeff from WI on September 14, 2009 at 11:43 AM
When will Journalism schools get “back to basics”?
Every since Woodward and Bernstein, reporters want to “make a difference”.
Guess what? I don’t want “a difference”, I want to know what the hell is going on. Just the facts. Who, what, when, where and how.
Not opinion, not the unique perspective of whatever victim group the reporter is brought to the table, not someone trying to slant the news in favor of the reporter’s pet political party or issue, just the facts.
Is that so hard?
What we need are editors firing reporters who think the news is “all about me”.
We need less celebrity, naval gazing “reporters” and more just plain reporters.
NoDonkey on September 14, 2009 at 11:44 AM
Ed, I think the NYT deserves the Captain Renault award for being shocked at their loss of readership.
jwolf on September 14, 2009 at 11:44 AM
Meteor Internet takes out the clueless dinosaurs. Youtube video online now.
Fletch54 on September 14, 2009 at 11:44 AM
It is too bad the dinosaur media can’t be compressed into a carbon-based fuel that we could run our automobiles on…
daesleeper on September 14, 2009 at 11:45 AM
Dems recent dissatisfacation w/the news is solely due to the rise of FoxNews. You can take that to the bank!
JAM on September 14, 2009 at 11:45 AM
NY Time reports “Kitten Missing in Yonkers!”
profitsbeard on September 14, 2009 at 11:45 AM
In other news, it is widely reported that various types of bears have been known to occasionally defecate in heavily forested areas.
CurtZHP on September 14, 2009 at 11:45 AM
So I guess 29% of Americans are complete f****g idiots.
angryed on September 14, 2009 at 11:46 AM
Nice to see the rest of our citizens our coming around to what we concluded several decades ago.
Took a blatant Marxist to open their eyes.
fogw on September 14, 2009 at 11:46 AM
Liberal Media Hypocrisy Test: http://tinyurl.com/kqs6ep
PCWilliams on September 14, 2009 at 11:46 AM
Ha! Very good.
Western_Civ on September 14, 2009 at 11:46 AM
Olbermunch Tonight-
Pew Research: WORST – PERSON – IN – THE – WORLD ! ! !
Doorgunner on September 14, 2009 at 11:47 AM
I am Shocked to hear this news and this sounds like award material. :-)
The Captain Louis Renault Award
JeffinSac on September 14, 2009 at 11:47 AM
FIFY
jgapinoy on September 14, 2009 at 11:47 AM
People know where to find accurate information online.
Accuracy is more exciting than the comfort zone of stroking.
maverick muse on September 14, 2009 at 11:47 AM
Seven
the term is metapropaganda
Joe Caps on September 14, 2009 at 11:48 AM
Libs: This vile hatred of a President is unprecedent in American history! Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!
Sane people: What about George Bush?
Libs: Huh?
Mr_Magoo on September 14, 2009 at 11:48 AM
FLASH! NY York Times Update:
“Kitten Not Missing In Yonkers, But In Flatbush!”.
(And does cute “human interest” story on how “Flatbush” is an Anglicization of the Old Dutch words “Vladbos“, or “wooded land”.)
profitsbeard on September 14, 2009 at 11:49 AM
It’s become more profitable to preach to a certain ideological niche than to tell the truth. As goes profitability, so goes the market. But once economic hard times come along, people are looking for different answers and so credibility becomes more of an issue.
The Calibur on September 14, 2009 at 11:49 AM
The story is missing something though. The democrats are complaining because they think the stories showing negatives toward liberals are inaccurate, and they accuse the media of having a conservative bias. The opposite of the truth and what’s been going on for the last 20+ years.
Don’t get giddy, the liberals still don’t know what’s going on in the real world. They think the news is SUPPOSED to be a lie festival geared toward pumping up the left and trashing the right. If it goes the other way it’s a republican conspiracy, not the fault of the left.
Spiritk9 on September 14, 2009 at 11:49 AM
The easy solution for most of the media ..
pretend that Bush is still President
but don’t write that
J_Crater on September 14, 2009 at 11:50 AM
With the advent of 0bama, the MSM went from a liberal bias, to full blown leftist advocacy.
Most Americans can smell BS, especially when it’s rubbed in their faces. Expect the MSM to continue to nosedive, as calls from the democrat party to bail them out increase.
Rebar on September 14, 2009 at 11:50 AM
What the poll doesn’t say is how the groups feel the bias is tilted. My guess is that there are many on the left that feel the media is biased to the RIGHT. I have several family members that feel that way and I have to shake my head at them. They honestly believe that the media is a right-wing arm of the government.
BioTeachEd on September 14, 2009 at 11:51 AM
“Barry and Bubba Do Lunch Today”
Actually, Barry will be doing lunch. Bubba will be doing the waitress.
Mr_Magoo on September 14, 2009 at 11:51 AM
Where is the survey on how people feel about alternate media: talk radio, blogs, etc?
PrincipledPilgrim on September 14, 2009 at 11:51 AM
In case you trivia buffs were wondering, CNN calls itself the “most trusted name in news” because of past results of this poll.
YYZ on September 14, 2009 at 11:52 AM
I completely disagree, Ed.
Yesterday was a truly historical experience.
What I’ve taken from this is the media isn’t bias, it’s complicit in the fed govt corruption. Tens of thousands my ass.
joshlbetts on September 14, 2009 at 11:53 AM
It’s sad how jouralism has died. It’s important for our type of government. There is one or two channels left…
It’s seems the detail investigations and fact checking is now being done by indepedent sources like blogs are college students. What are the news networks doing with there money? It’s not going to research.
Oil Can on September 14, 2009 at 11:56 AM
If Fox News has the highest ratings, wouldn’t that make FNC the ‘mainstream’ media now?
What’s ‘mainstream’ about papers and channels that nobody watches, or when they do, they don’t buy what they’re hearing?
bridgetown on September 14, 2009 at 11:58 AM
Can we please, please, please, stop calling them the “mainstream” media?
If they are mainstream, what is Fox? Fringe?
Why would we cede (rhetorically, at least) the center and, thus, the majority?
Call them the “dominant” media, “establishment” media, “broadcast” media or, if you want to be obvious, the “left-wing” media. (Personally, I think “dominant” media would be effective because there’s no doubt they have higher viewership and circulation, and the word “dominant” carries just a touch of darkness. I think calling them the “left-wing” media is less effective because it’s clearly a partisan term and unlikely to be adopted by the center.)
Words do matter. Obama got that right.
SwampYankee on September 14, 2009 at 11:58 AM
That can’t be good for Obambi with his criticism of America when abroad.
aikidoka on September 14, 2009 at 11:58 AM
You clearly aren’t using the new O-math.
Zeroes disappear as needed.
profitsbeard on September 14, 2009 at 11:59 AM
In other news, news organization report that polling companies use skewed samples in presenting their poll results. Vicious cycle smearing between news organizations and polling companies to ensue.
WashJeff on September 14, 2009 at 12:01 PM
At least Pravda does their job, MSM.
yoda on September 14, 2009 at 12:02 PM
Proof in black & white.
Will FCC Czar, Mark Lloyd make the biased MSM give 100% of their operating budgets to the less biased media?
TN Mom on September 14, 2009 at 12:03 PM
I don’t believe that, even if they were reporting accurately, newspaper sales would possibly still be growing. People just don’t care to read day-old news anymore. Why would anyone rely on dead tree editions when they can get up-to-the-minute news 24/7 via the internet and cable TV?
I would agree, though, that bias and inaccurate reporting has expedited their demise.
UltimateBob on September 14, 2009 at 12:03 PM
Here’s what I don’t get. Media is suffering, financially. The data makes it obvious that they’d fare better if they would only cover the news more fairly. Yet they won’t seem to take the hint.
You’d think someone running these places would have some simple business sense.
Daggett on September 14, 2009 at 12:05 PM
Memo to Maureen Dowd:
You can now wipe the Obama-drool off your chin.
Sincerely,
Pew Research
TN Mom on September 14, 2009 at 12:06 PM
.
VegasRick on September 14, 2009 at 12:06 PM
Newsweek and Time have the market cornered for people that like their ripened for a least a week.
WashJeff on September 14, 2009 at 12:07 PM
Breaking News:
Media caught (Kool-Aid) drinking on the job. In a related story, FNC ask Network Media “how do ya like me now”.
TN Mom on September 14, 2009 at 12:08 PM
Americans to Old Media:
YOU LIE!
TN Mom on September 14, 2009 at 12:10 PM
You know, it’s funny – when I’m sitting in the dentist’s office and I pick up a copy of Newsweak, I’m unable to tell if it’s the most recent edition or from a couple of months ago. Seriously.
UltimateBob on September 14, 2009 at 12:10 PM
Without looking at the date, of course. :-)
UltimateBob on September 14, 2009 at 12:11 PM
The word lickspittle comes to mind.
UltimateBob on September 14, 2009 at 12:14 PM
And nothing will change. The MSM now uses a snorkel with its head in the sand, hoping things will get better.
d1carter on September 14, 2009 at 12:14 PM
I used to write for a newspaper as a closeted conservative. I distinctly remember a staff meeting where the editor laughed at a local talk show host’s allegations of liberal bias against our paper.
Quite honestly, I was shocked. He was so sure that our paper was unbiased – but honestly, even if that was true (it wasn’t), wouldn’t the APPEARANCE or ALLEGATION of bias be worth looking into if we had been truly unbiased? Wouldn’t that be a problem?
Red Cloud on September 14, 2009 at 12:16 PM
Obama is once again on the TV. I don’t care what he says. He funnels money to criminal organizations. That’s all anyone needs to know. Nothing he says is as it seems. We just need to put the whole country on hold until he is out of office. Sad but that is the only wise thing. Stop Congress stop everything. The more we allow him any room the more power his criminal friends have.
petunia on September 14, 2009 at 12:18 PM
Look at the trend lines. Seems things stabilize or rise when a Republican is President, and goes downhill during a Dem Admin. Hmmmm.
Patrick S on September 14, 2009 at 12:18 PM
Only 29%?
Mangy Scot on September 14, 2009 at 12:18 PM
Ick.
The MSM is so gross!
TN Mom on September 14, 2009 at 12:20 PM
The “The Left-wing Imperialist Media” words for me.
petunia on September 14, 2009 at 12:22 PM
The “The Left-wing Imperialist Media” words for me.
petunia on September 14, 2009 at 12:22 PM
Second try.
Oh yeah Obama just called himself a progressive. Progressives are Community-Criminal Organizers.
petunia on September 14, 2009 at 12:24 PM
Related parodies:
“New York Times to Reduce Costs and Increase Transparency By Not Using Ink and Paper on Reports Critical of Administration Agenda” http://optoons.blogspot.com/2009/09/new-york-times-to-reduce-costs-and.html
“Photographer Disciplined for Snapping President at Bad Angle” http://optoons.blogspot.com/2009/03/photographer-disciplined-for-snapping.html
“White House Press Corps Struggles to Maintain Objective Distance from President While Sharing His Teleprompter” http://optoons.blogspot.com/2009/06/white-house-press-corps-struggles-to.html
Mervis Winter on September 14, 2009 at 12:24 PM
Breaking: Public singles out Olberman as biggest douche on the planet!
sonnyspats1 on September 14, 2009 at 12:25 PM
This just in…the sun is bright and water is wet.
I play the video clip of the D.C. crowd shouting down CNN every time I need a good laugh.
Wyznowski on September 14, 2009 at 12:27 PM
The headline of the report should have read “61% of Americans Expect Media to Publish Only News that Confirms Their Biases — they can’t handle the truth.”
Without going into the tank, the dominant media does an overwhelmingly reasonable job at gathering and publishing news. The idea that a bunch of blogs can even come close to providing the largely objective job they do is laughable.
Bleeds Blue on September 14, 2009 at 12:28 PM
Warning! Scooby Doo impersonation:
“And we would’ve gotten away with it, too, if it weren’t for those pesky bloggers.”
John the Libertarian on September 14, 2009 at 12:32 PM
Ahh – one of the pitiful 29%.
Vashta.Nerada on September 14, 2009 at 12:34 PM
I believe there is more of a linkage, in that the new technology exposed the already existing MSM bias that had always existed.
Would Walter Cronkite had been successfull in throwing the Vietnam war, had military blogs been available to tell the people the truth about the Tet offensive?
MarkTheGreat on September 14, 2009 at 12:34 PM
Breaking..
CBS Katie Couric and MS-NBC’s Andrea Mitchell: Americans aren’t smart enough to realize that biased news is good for them.
TN Mom on September 14, 2009 at 12:35 PM
Somehow the TV got onto CBS yesterday and the end of “60 Minutes,” and that old fossil Andy Rooney was pontificating on Walter Cronkite. He was whining about how they tried to “make a real difference.” I turned to Mrs Crazy Legs and said, “And that is the problem. They’re not supposed to try to ‘make a real difference’ they’re supposed to report the facts dispassionately and let us make our own decisions.”
crazy_legs on September 14, 2009 at 12:37 PM
LOL. That is my mother in law. For 8 years (well I’ve only known her for 5 but I assume all 8) all I heard out of her mouth was “Bush is an idiot”, “Bush is a moron”, “Bush is a fascist”.
Now I dare question THE ONE’s spending and all of a sudden she says “It’s horrible that you can’t respect the office of the president even if you don’t agree with Obama”. To which I say, are you kidding me, what about the last 8 years. And she says with a straight face, “I never once disrespected the president”.
angryed on September 14, 2009 at 12:42 PM
They also appear on command.
Such as when Barry needs to tell people how many jobs his programs have saved.
MarkTheGreat on September 14, 2009 at 12:43 PM
Absolutely amazing that it took that long to reach these low levels of of public acceptance of the media’s integrity, they should be lower. The country is a sea of ignorance and stupidity and that’s why we got the government we gots. A good part of the population might as well have been born and bred on Mars.
cjk on September 14, 2009 at 1:08 PM
I will bet that every media outlet thinks they mean the “other” outlets. Can’t be us!
faol on September 14, 2009 at 1:11 PM
You conveniently ignore the documented evidence that the media does go in the tank.
Or will you still in diapers 5 years ago when Newsweak’s Evan Thomas admitted on national TV that his media colleagues would all go in the tank for Jeanne-Claude Kerri?
Kerri served in Vietnam, by the way. And Cambodia too. Both at the same time.
Del Dolemonte on September 14, 2009 at 1:20 PM
Not to worry. What MSM bailouts don’t fix, Mark Lloyd will.
petefrt on September 14, 2009 at 1:22 PM
The last group hanging on to the NY Times is the bird owners and they need to look for another source of cage liners.
This is good news and I hope they all lose their jobs and have to beg for food in the streets.
Some of them do however qualify to work for ACORN
Until they do go where is the pay csar looking into the huge salaries these monkeys calling themselves TV journalist? Any thing above minimum wage is above their pay grade.
bluegrass on September 14, 2009 at 1:25 PM
Can’t wait til Obie and Chrissy report this one.
Watch the Fox ratings now!
bluegrass on September 14, 2009 at 1:33 PM
crazy_legs on September 14, 2009 at 12:37 PM
Exactly – you want to “make a difference”, get on the editorial page or run for office.
But don’t try and steer us to your view through your “reporting”. The media’s inability to separate their views from how they report stories is disgraceful and unethical.
NoDonkey on September 14, 2009 at 1:48 PM
Del Dolemonte on September 14, 2009 at 1:20 PM
Not to mention how CNN admitted they covered up for Saddam Hussein’s regime in order to continue to have access.
Which they used to tell only the stories the dictator wanted told.
That’s “accurate reporting” according to the MSM.
And Walter Duranty still has his Pulitzer Prize for covering up the murder of tens of millions of people in the USSR.
That’s “making a difference” according to “progressives”.
NoDonkey on September 14, 2009 at 1:53 PM
In other news, it is widely reported that various types of bears have been known to occasionally defecate in heavily forested areas.
CurtZHP on September 14, 2009
This just in from Vatican City: We have confirmed that the pope is, in fact, Catholic.
SKYFOX on September 14, 2009 at 2:07 PM
Hey, when George Soros is bank rolling your lies, why change anything?
csdeven on September 14, 2009 at 2:32 PM
Yeah, and they wonder why they are going broke.
Terrye on September 14, 2009 at 3:15 PM
“You mean that Bender is the ‘Evil Bender?’ I am shocked. Shocked! Well, not that shocked.”
[ / Phillip J. Fry]
Blacksmith on September 14, 2009 at 3:20 PM
I went to the book store to pick up the latest copy of “Men’s Health.” The issue is dedicated to Barry. It has his face on the cover. His personal plan for working out and staying in shape.
I threw up in my mouth a little and walked quickly from the store. I will not buy a magazine with him on the cover, or a newspaper that touts him. I won’t watch NBC, or MSNBC. Not their news channel. Not their sitcoms. Nothing.
Star20 on September 14, 2009 at 3:39 PM
I’m not so sure that accuracy is the problem. To me, the problem with news organizations, in general, is what editors deem newsworthy and what they deem worthy of ignoring. This is where the bias is; where it’s always been. The difference between news organizations and the internet is that a news organization will repeat a story over and over again to avoid reporting on another story (simple laziness, I suspect) while the internet has it all out there all the time. It’s the same sources of news that have been available to news agencies in the past only now everyone has access to it. Thus, regular folks are now able to judge for themselves the merits of each story in spite of a reporter’s claims that his stories are more important than anything else out there.
jakabok_botch on September 14, 2009 at 4:42 PM
News analysis was once pretty much soley the province of news agencies. This lead to a fairly small contingent of opinion makers who were at the forefront of political thought in the past. With the internet, the dynamic changed, much to the chagrin of the once lauded political opinion elite. We now exist in a world where news agencies are fighting against the tide of information access. Where once they were the gate-keepers of opinion they now find themselves on the side-lines and it must scare the bejesus out of them.
jakabok_botch on September 14, 2009 at 4:51 PM