Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Trust in TV News is Waning
College News.org ^ | August 4, 2012 | by Jeffrey M. McCall

Posted on 08/05/2012 7:00:40 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer

A recent Gallup survey reports Americans are increasingly frustrated with the quality of television news. Only 21 percent of Americans now express “a great deal” of confidence in television news. That is the lowest score ever, dropping from the 46 percent level when Gallup started asking this question in 1993. Declines in confidence are found across all age groups and political affiliations. Given the recent performance of TV news, further deterioration in confidence is inevitable.

ABC’s Brian Ross jumped to conclusions and suggested a link between the Aurora movie shooter and the tea party. NBC’s unprofessional editing of the George Zimmerman 911 audio led to a false impression. Then NBC made misleading edits of a Mitt Romney campaign speech that seemed to make the GOP nominee appear shocked by the technology at convenience stores.

These are not accidents. They are egregious errors in judgment that could be avoided if the professional culture were more committed to accuracy and fairness, and less preoccupied with being first, showing off and sensationalizing the news.

Television is still the source from which most citizens get their news. A free press was established to provide the information needs of a democracy. Television news, as the citizenry’s prime surrogate, assumes a heavy responsibility. The nation needs and deserves a television news industry that enlightens and empowers citizens.

(Excerpt) Read more at collegenews.org ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: bias; journalism; journalists; media
by Jeffrey M. McCall, professor of communication at DePauw University and author of Viewer Discretion Advised: Taking Control of Mass Media Influences
1 posted on 08/05/2012 7:00:46 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

I turned it off fifteen years ago.


2 posted on 08/05/2012 7:05:44 AM PDT by 4buttons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

I haven’t watched TV or Cable news in years. I read a lot, and I’ll watch the occasional clip on the Net, but ALL of it is, generally, crap. They each preach to their choir while in a quest for ratings. From MSNBC to Fox and everything in between they are all useless. People need to stop listening to pundits saying what they (listeners) HOPE is true and get the facts for themselves.


3 posted on 08/05/2012 7:06:15 AM PDT by RIghtwardHo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
I get more information from this site than I do from radio, tv or newspapers.

Only reason I buy a newspaper nowadays is coupons and the comics. Even those are available online. I rarely watch tv news, not even Fox (”fair and balanced” my arse).

4 posted on 08/05/2012 7:09:47 AM PDT by fatnotlazy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

As far as news goes...

...This ain’t it


5 posted on 08/05/2012 7:10:16 AM PDT by Vaquero (Don't pick a fight with an old guy. If he is too old to fight, he'll just kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Ya think?

I haven’t watched the Leftist POS news in decades.


6 posted on 08/05/2012 7:14:01 AM PDT by alice_in_bubbaland (When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes mandatory- Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RIghtwardHo

Only to point this out...as the number declines...the networks will eventually reach a point where they discuss the cost of production and maintaining a news network staff. My guess is that one of the big three (ABC, CBS, or NBC)...will come up by 2020 and dump their news team. They might maintain a Hollywood or entertainment team...but that’s mostly because people still watch that.

The writing will be on the wall, and folks will began to ask stupid questions at that point. Why bother having a news team in Europe or Asia? Why bother with a full-time White House reporter? Why run a Sunday morning chat show when it’s less than 500k people that watch it nationwide?


7 posted on 08/05/2012 7:18:33 AM PDT by pepsionice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Vaquero

Americans recognize (and are appalled by) “advocacy journalism” when they see it.

The press used to be regarded as honest brokers of the facts. No longer.


8 posted on 08/05/2012 7:19:11 AM PDT by Walrus (Restoring America starts today! Let's roll!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: 4buttons
Amen brother. I have not watched any CNN since the first gulf war. I have not ever watched CNBC, MSNBC at all. ABC, NBC, and CBS left my house a couple of decades ago. I don't even watch Fox anymore. I am sick of the liberals they have added to get what they term “fair and balanced.” There has been no fair and balanced in news reporting in 30 years or more.
9 posted on 08/05/2012 7:22:25 AM PDT by RetiredArmy (You can almost hear the footsteps of Jesus. He is right at the door!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

The MSM long ago ceased making any effort to report any semblance of real news. They clearly support the leftist agenda and are ‘shaping’ the news to convey that point of view in the most favorable way. Conversely, the MSM (PBS included) attacks all things conservative. Most people are pretty much aware by now that the MSM are purveyors of propaganda dressed up as ‘news’. The alphabet news organizations have completely lost what little credibility they ever had and are no better than their erstwhile Russian counterparts Tass or Isvestia.

Yahoo! and its recent alliance with new soulmate CNBC are a virtual political attack machine that makes the rest of the MSM look fair minded by comparison.


10 posted on 08/05/2012 7:26:28 AM PDT by Starboard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

What’s that other ABC twit named Brian? No mention of “Gun Walker” for what, 18 months, give or take?


11 posted on 08/05/2012 7:29:19 AM PDT by Calvin Locke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
Trust in TV News is Waning

DUH. Tell us something we didn't already figure out about 10 years ago.

12 posted on 08/05/2012 7:31:43 AM PDT by rockabyebaby (We are sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo screwed!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RIghtwardHo
...get the facts for themselves.

How, exactly, do you do that?

13 posted on 08/05/2012 7:34:34 AM PDT by lonestar (It takes a village of idiots to elect a village idiot.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Walrus
Americans recognize (and are appalled by) “advocacy journalism” when they see it.

The press used to be regarded as honest brokers of the facts. No longer.

I fear tthis is only true for the 48% that didn't vote for the POSOTUS in 08

14 posted on 08/05/2012 7:34:34 AM PDT by Vaquero (Don't pick a fight with an old guy. If he is too old to fight, he'll just kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

I thought we had a little hope with Fox. But it now appears after a few years they too are falling into the category of entertainment. Fox & Friends has turned into the Today show.

And to think that at one time they actually ran commercials mocking the lamestream media about the crap they spewed.


15 posted on 08/05/2012 7:35:11 AM PDT by unixfox (Abolish Slavery, Repeal The 16th Amendment!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lonestar

Absolutely love the tagline!


16 posted on 08/05/2012 7:36:06 AM PDT by rockabyebaby (We are sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo screwed!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
Hey, TV news. I have a suggestion.

How about no longer SHAMELESSLY shilling for Obama and the Communist left? How about no longer pushing the gay agenda? How about no longer lying outright?

Naw. That would never work.

As you were.

17 posted on 08/05/2012 7:36:26 AM PDT by Lazamataz (I love the Universe, and it loves me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

It’s long past “is waning.”


18 posted on 08/05/2012 7:46:46 AM PDT by bgill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Personally, I trust the Newsers just as much today as I always have!

19 posted on 08/05/2012 7:54:32 AM PDT by Zakeet (Liberalism - Ideas so good that you have to be forced to accept them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 4buttons

“I turned it off fifteen years ago.”

I threw my TV away during the OJ trial. I’ve been reading only since.


20 posted on 08/05/2012 7:57:59 AM PDT by Gen.Blather
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Vaquero
“I fear tthis is only true for the 48% that didn't vote for the POSOTUS in 08 “

Regarding that 48%, when I was in elementary school I remember discussions about how difficult it was to imagine Americans killing Americans, even sometimes relatives, in the Civil War. It was a discussion from the perspective of ‘that couldn't happen now’.

However, seeing how divided our country is, and thinking about how hateful the rhetoric often is, I have little trouble imaging a significant proportion of the left being ‘all in’ with the idea of either coercing or eradicating those on the ‘hated’ right. It's clearly gotten that ugly.

I also have no question that a large number would love to see a ‘cultural revolution’ like that of China - just going in a taking stuff from those who have been successful and that they thus resent. To some extent, OWS and the ‘go after the 1%’ movements are early prototypes of a leftist cultural revolution that they wish would happen.

21 posted on 08/05/2012 8:03:54 AM PDT by pieceofthepuzzle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
I went to work for a company after another employee was seriously injured in a light plane accident. After he returned to work, I pointed out to him a newspaper article hidden on the bulletin board about his airplane crash. He carefully read it, and then said to me, "You know, I was injured in a plane crash, too."

The point is, he didn't even recognize a newspaper story about his own plane crash. If a "news" report of something as non political as a plane crash is so inaccurate that the pilot of the crash doesn't even recognize it as his own incident, just think of the distortion that is present in a political story, where the writer can't help but have a personal bias.

22 posted on 08/05/2012 8:22:46 AM PDT by norwaypinesavage (Galileo: In science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of one individual)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lonestar; Oldeconomybuyer; RIghtwardHo

23 posted on 08/05/2012 8:41:27 AM PDT by Old Sarge (We are now officially over the precipice, we just havent struck the ground yet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: 4buttons

I can’t believe anyone trusted TV news in 1993. They were lying like hyenas for Bill Clinton back then.


24 posted on 08/05/2012 8:55:32 AM PDT by Luke21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

What I find most appalling is that so many Libs/Progressives (and I personally know three women still supporting Obama) say they watch that sick wanna-be comedienne, Jon Stewart and believe that he is an honest journalist delivering the “news.” They make their decisions based on his twisted thoughts. Same for that other hypocrite, Bill Mahar, who Libs seem to tolerate for some strange reason, and even believe. Why people want to watch what they think is “news” that has been spun by joke writers and is being spoon fed to them by people who really just want to ridicule and not report the truth, is beyond me. It says something is very lacking when a person would rather just laugh about issues, or agree with someone who makes fun of others, rather than take a serious look into what the issues really are.


25 posted on 08/05/2012 9:33:03 AM PDT by CitizenM (Obama - The architect of the decline of the U.S.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

But you’ll have to admit that TV keeps us up to date about the things that really matter, like when Lindsey Lohan forgets her underwear.


26 posted on 08/05/2012 10:12:34 AM PDT by Colinsky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

I think I stopped watching TV News in high school when the Cronkite was on every night bringing the daily bad news from Viet Nam into our homes. I subscribed to the WSJ in an Engineering Economics class and have kept it current almost ever since. Then, with the advent of the WWW and more reliable and honest news, who would ever need to plop themselves down in front of the boob tube to watch radical libs spout their biases as “news”?

“Trust” in TV news died with Huntley and Brinkley.


27 posted on 08/05/2012 10:18:48 AM PDT by ProtectOurFreedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ProtectOurFreedom

As a highschool student Crankbait made me sick. So did the Super Liar Dan the Blabber. My Mom was a leftist hippie but hated them both as well simply because she didn’t like liars.


28 posted on 08/05/2012 1:16:22 PM PDT by liberty or death
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: CitizenM

They’ve doomed themselves.

Fox is eventually going to reach a critical mass, and the media bias will be eliminated.

Meanwhile the “media” is becoming a biased pool of mostly nonsense.


29 posted on 08/05/2012 1:25:16 PM PDT by Cringing Negativism Network (America doesn't need any new laws. America needs freedom!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: lonestar
...get the facts for themselves.
How, exactly, do you do that?
By reading the FReeper commentaries on the articles posted here - then thinking.
The wisest and most cautious of us all frequently gives credit to stories which he himself is afterwards both ashamed and astonished that he could possibly think of believing . . .

It is acquired wisdom and experience only that teach incredulity,
and they very seldom teach it enough.
  - Adam Smith


30 posted on 08/05/2012 4:21:46 PM PDT by conservatism_IS_compassion (The idea around which “liberalism" coheres is that NOTHING actually matters except PR.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer; 4buttons; RIghtwardHo; fatnotlazy; Vaquero; pepsionice; Walrus; RetiredArmy; ...
These are not accidents. They are egregious errors in judgment that could be avoided if the professional culture were more committed to accuracy and fairness, and less preoccupied with being first, showing off and sensationalizing the news.

Television is still the source from which most citizens get their news. A free press was established to provide the information needs of a democracy. Television news, as the citizenry’s prime surrogate, assumes a heavy responsibility. The nation needs and deserves a television news industry that enlightens and empowers citizens.

Broadcast journalism has its licenses which limit direct competition in broadcast journalism; because of that broadcasting has a theoretical responsibility to be objective. But there is a difference between trying to be objective, and trying to look like you are being objective.

In a larger sense, the problem isn’t the medium used, whether print or broadcast - the problem is the nature of journalism as we know it. The nature, that is, of the wire service.

In the founding era, newspapers were mostly weeklies, and some newspapers had no deadline at all, and just went to press when the printer was good and ready. They had no communication technology which was not accessible to the public at large, and by the time the newspaper came out on Wednesday (say) you might very well already know any news which reached the printer shortly after press time the previous Tuesday night. From the same sources the printer had. Consequently, newspapers were as much about the printer’s take on the news as they were about the news itself. IOW, newspaper printers were more like today’s talk radio hosts than like today’s “objective” journalists.

But with the wire services (and a single one, the AP, has always dominated by its own monopolistic design), journalism became homogenized. All major outlets have the same information feed, and the reporters working for the individual members of the AP aspire to have their stories picked up by other outlets nationwide. They conform their formats and their slant on their stories to the Associated Press template. And since the individual editors don’t even know, much less supervise, reporters who contribute stories to their papers via the newswire, the whole operation of wire service journalism hinges on the shared assumptions of its membership.

It is a cult.

Like all cults, it conflates its own interest with the public good. The cult of “objective” wire service journalism places the promotion of the interests intrinsic to journalism - the desire for attention, prosperity, and influence - above the interests of individual people and against the cumulative interests of people generally.

The cult of wire service journalism requires that the public assume that its priests are objective, so its membership promotes that absurd proposition incessantly. To claim objectivity - even to belong to a group which claims objectivity for you - is to foreclose the very possibility of seriously attempting to be objective. Because belief in your own objectivity is the defining characteristic of its opposite, subjectivity. No one can do the real work of attempting objectivity - no one can openly lay out the reasons why he or she might not be objective - and simultaneously claim that they actually are objective.

The cult of “objective” journalism places bad news - places criticism, condemnation, and complaint - on a plane far above getting your hands dirty by actually trying to do something. "The man who is actually in the arena” gets no respect from the cult of criticism, condemnation, and complaint.

The cult of “objective” journalism places novelty far above accuracy. Consequently “There’s nothing more worthless than yesterday’s Newspaper.” The cult of superficial attention-grabbing defines a big story as always “Man Bites Dog,” not “Dog Bites Man.”

The cult of “objective” journalism flatters anyone who promotes journalism’s ego, and heaps derision on anyone who openly considers other principles and constituencies to be more important than the cult of journalism. “Objective” journalism flatters its acolytes by calling them “liberal” or “progressive” - and derides its skeptics with terms like “conservative” and “right wing extremists.” And, during the Soviet era, “Cold Warriors.”

There is no objectivity in “objective” journalism. “Objective journalism” is a propaganda cult. One which successfully cons a very great number of Americans. Most of us have fallen for the con, at least some of the time . . .

The wisest and most cautious of us all frequently gives credit to stories which he himself is afterwards both ashamed and astonished that he could possibly think of believing . . .
It is acquired wisdom and experience only that teach incredulity,
and they very seldom teach it enough. - Adam Smith

31 posted on 08/05/2012 4:58:03 PM PDT by conservatism_IS_compassion (The idea around which “liberalism" coheres is that NOTHING actually matters except PR.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: abb; conservatism_IS_compassion
Ping to an excellent newser analysis.
32 posted on 08/05/2012 5:11:53 PM PDT by Zakeet (Liberalism - Ideas so good that you have to be forced to accept them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson