Public Trust in Media Accuracy & Fairness Plunges, Liberal v Conservative Bias Gap at 28 Points

Photo of Brent Baker.
  • Bookmark and Share

“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,” a new poll from the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, embargoed for release at 11 PM EDT Sunday night, discovered.

The survey, of 1,506 adults conducted in late July, found “nearly three-quarters (74%) say news organizations tend to favor one side in dealing with political and social issues,” up 21 points from 53 percent 24 years ago, “while just 18% say they deal fairly with all sides.” The percent who perceive the media as liberal versus conservative remains very lopsided, though the difference has increased by 7 points -- from 40 percent vs. 19 percent in 1985 to 50 percent vs. 22 percent now, a 28 point split.

In addition -- surprise, surprise -- “Democrats hold considerably more positive views than Republicans of CNN, MSNBC, the New York Times and the news operations of the broadcast networks” with “the starkest partisan division...seen in assessments of the New York Times” as “Republicans view the New York Times negatively by a margin of nearly two-to-one (31% to 16%), while Democrats view it positively by an almost five-to-one margin (39% to 8%).”

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

Pew reported “MSNBC also rates substantially higher among Democrats (60%) than among Republicans (34%)” while there's a 26 point partisan gap in favorability toward the broadcast networks with 55 percent of Republicans favorably disposed to news on ABC, CBS and NBC compared to an overwhelming 81 percent of Democrats. (See table below)

For many more related polls, check the “How the Public Views the Media” section of the MRC's Media Bias Basics.

An excerpt from “Press Accuracy Rating Hits Two Decade Low: Public Evaluations of the News Media: 1985-2009,” dated September 13 (PDF version):

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.

....

Democrats hold considerably more positive views than Republicans of CNN, MSNBC, The New York Times and the news operations of the broadcast networks, and their views of National Public Radio are somewhat more favorable than those of Republicans. By contrast, views of Fox News -- and to a lesser extent The Wall Street Journal -- are more positive among Republicans than Democrats.

Partisan differences in views of Fox News have increased substantially since 2007. Today, a large majority of Republicans view Fox News positively (72%), compared with just 43% of Democrats. In 2007, 73% of Republicans and 61% of Democrats viewed Fox News favorably. Three-quarters (75%) of Democrats assess CNN favorably, while just 44% of Republicans do so, which is little changed from two years ago. MSNBC also rates substantially higher among Democrats (60%) than among Republicans (34%).

But the starkest partisan division is seen in assessments of The New York Times. Although most Americans are not familiar enough with the Times to express an opinion, Republicans view The New York Times negatively by a margin of nearly two-to-one (31% to 16%), while Democrats view it positively by an almost five-to-one margin (39% to 8%). More independents rate the Times favorably (29%) than unfavorably (18%).

More favorable Republican ratings are reserved for The Wall Street Journal. Within the GOP, the balance of favorable to unfavorable assessments of the Journal is second only to that for Fox News. Democratic and independent assessments of The Wall Street Journal are also, on balance, positive. And the balance of opinion regarding National Public Radio is favorable across the board; however, Democratic opinions of NPR are somewhat more positive than those of Republicans (50% favorable vs. 39%).

.....

The public has long been critical of the press in several areas: in 1985, majorities said that news organizations tried to cover up mistakes, tended to favor one side on political and social issues and were influenced by the powerful.

However, in that initial survey on press performance, conducted by the Times-Mirror Center, most people (55%) said that news organizations “get the facts straight,” while 34% said stories were often inaccurate.

....

In 1985, fewer than half (45%) said news organizations were politically biased, while 36% said they were careful to avoid bias. Today, by greater than two-to-one (60% to 26%), more say the press is biased.

Nearly three-quarters (74%) say news organizations tend to favor one side in dealing with political and social issues, while just 18% say they deal fairly with all sides. The proportion saying the press favors one side has risen eight points since 2007 (from 66%). In 1985, a much smaller majority (53%) said the press favored one side.
 
There has been a comparable shift in views of the press’s independence. Nearly three-quarters (74%) now say news organizations are influenced by powerful people and organizations compared with 20% who say they are pretty independent. In 1985, by a far smaller margin, more said that news organizations were influenced by the powerful than said they were pretty independent (53% to 37%).

Notably, the balance of opinion about whether news organizations are liberal or conservative has changed little since 1985. At that time, about twice as many said the press was liberal than conservative (40% vs. 19%). That continues to be the case today (50% vs. 22%), although somewhat more people offer an opinion about this issue than did so then....

—Brent Baker is Vice President for Research and Publications at the Media Research Center


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

If you're a Libtard, you

If you're a Libtard, you certainly wouldn't think the press was biased at all.  Now, an activist Libtard might...and be OK with that of course.

So, the numbers will only go so low and no further.

One of the 34% who thinks George W. Bush was a great President. One of the 86% who wants to bring back the stock and pillory.

TRADING PLACES...

RR GOP,

I'll bet you $1 dollar that it not only can go lower, but will go lower. There are many traditional liberal dems who don't realize how radical the current Dem leadership is & who support them. Many of these folks are vets who fought in Vietnam or Korea & remember what communism/marxism is. They more we see of Obama, the more people see who this guy reveals himself to be. I have hope that the people will reject his agenda will gain steam through 2010 & beyond. Obama & company need to kicked around, we are just starting to push back. We need to finish this guy & his agenda shoved down their throats. 

 

"...How blind can you be, don't you see...

...that the gambler lost all he does not have..."  

Nightwish

Does CNN have a higher Favorable Rating than Fox

If I read the chart correctly, more respondents had a favorable opinion of CNN than Fox News.

 

I knew one guy who was so

I knew one guy who was so far to the Left that he thought CNN was a Republican mouthpiece cheering G.W. Bush. Which is sort of like viewing the Nazis as running charitable institutions for Jews.

I know a guy like that

I know a guy like that too.  An older liberal who seems to have done way too many drugs back in the 60s and 70s.  This guy swears that the media are all owned and controlled by big corporations and are thus Republican mouthpieces!  

There's simply no way to talk him out of it - it's insane!!!

These days

These days, the Democrats want to have their ears tickled, not filled with truth.

This research is hardly a surprise.

What's funny/frustrating

What's funny/frustrating about these results are that most conservatives already understand which networks favors their political viewpoints. Conversely, most liberals, even those who do the thinking and talking for the rest of them, don't appear to be able to see the bias towards their viewpoints on networks like CNN, MSNBC, NYT, etc. They have been totally enveloped in traditional media bias for so long and are so sure of its objectivity and fairness that the growing conservative news presence confuses them. They are lost but to assume that these new outlets are for anybody but knuckle-dragging conservatives.

Well, when you hear people

Well, when you hear people saying what you believe to be true, you believe that they're being accurate and fair. And if you live in a Lib vacuum, where are you going to get a hint that there's more things in Heaven and Earth than dreamt of in their philosophy?

I'm not sure why you say

I'm not sure why you say liberals aren't aware of the outlets that favor them since the poll results seem to indicate exactly the opposite. Those news sources that we conservatives identify as liberal-leaning are also the ones most favored by Democrats (i.e. roughly speaking, liberals), and the ones we identify as conservative-leaning are the most disliked by Democrats. In other words, they appear to know which outlets favor them and disfavor them just as well as we know it...which is really not surprising in the least, is it?

Whether liberals identify liberal-friendly reporting as bias is an entirely different question--one which isn't directly addressed in the poll. What? you cry. How can I say that? I can say it because it's entirely possible to believe that a news outlet favors the liberal side simply because the liberal or leftist philosophy is objectively true. In other words, news sources attempt to report the truth, and the truth just happens to be liberalism. Therefore, there's no "bias" involved, unless you're going to include bias toward the truth in your assessment, which no one really does. Viewed from this perspective, conservative-leaning outlets are by definition biased and lacking in credibility, inasmuch as they (again, by definition) favor falsehood over truth and accuracy.

This has been the position taken by liberals in the MSM for years. If you've ever wondered how they can do some of the things they do while remaining completely oblivious to their lack of objectivity, this is it. (It's also why this poll will be met with a huge, collective yawn from the liberal media: all it says to them is that FOX--and the evil boogeyman Talk Radio--is succeeding in brainwashing huge numbers of imbeciles into watching their programming instead of the liberals' programming. Indeed, the only part of the poll that might cause some concern as far as I can see is the across-the-board drop in viewers' perception of media accuracy. Even those who believe CBS, MSNBC, etc. remain bastions of fairness and integrity apparently think that those same networks aren't getting their stories right.)

Adversaries

When you go into a court of law, the two sides present their cases to decision-makers (a judge or jury) who are supposed to be impartial. But the court of public opinion is a little different: the decision-makers (all of us) are also advocates. How do we make decisions among ourselves? We vote.

Several premises about the media, which we once took for granted, should be re-examined:

  1. We trust the media to tell us what's going on. But that means that they know what's going on. If their reporters spend all their time with liberals, guess what they're going to report?
  2. You can report a fire objectively. But how do you report a political discussion objectively? Politics are inherently subjective.
  3. Most political discussions are focused by legislation, for natural reasons. All bills are (theoretically) attempts to fix problems, but the question is whether the legislation will fix the problems, and at what cost. There are no answers to those questions before bills are passed, so the arguments are always pure speculation.

We always get purely speculative debates about pieces of legislation, but do you ever see a discussion about the ideologies themselves? If the ideologies drive the discussion more than the specifics of any bill, why do we spend all our time on the specifics when the ideology is the real driver?

This is not good news

This is not good news for any of us. I know people will jump on the band wagon with condeming the MSM as I have but the real losers are us. Notice how Fox has lost confidence from Democrats. That is probably due to the drum beat of the liberal media that Fox does not accurately report the news. It does not matter if they do or not the real story is that they are losing credibility with a large segment of the population who want to think that way.

The more people divide into thier own camps and only listen to thier own particular chior preachers the more damage is done. The over politicalization of network and cable news outlets while entertaining is doing real damage to our republic. Each side thinks they hold a monopoly on the truth. The truth is always a lot harder to find than on a simple news broadcast.

I support NB in thier efforts to expose bias in the news but we should also call out Fox if they get facts wrong or over editorialize thier regular news broadcasts. We should also take anyone to task that either misrepresents facts or makes them up in the editorial content.

So far I have only caught Fox very few times being inaccurate but they do let editorial content slip into the regular news more since Brit Hume has left the regular day to day operations.

I think if we do this Fox will only get better and maybe more Democrats will begin to trust Fox again. I also think that once Americans see that we do not accept inaccuracies from any source conservatives will regain some respect as well. By conservatives I mean us and not what passes for conservatives in Washington today.

Notice how Fox has lost

Notice how Fox has lost confidence from Democrats. That is probably due to the drum beat of the liberal media.

Perhaps it's because of the nation's politicians instead?

June 16, 2009: Obama: I've got one television station that is entirely devoted to attacking my administration
March 28, 2009: Obama Camp: Sources tell The Sleuth that the Obama camp has "frozen out" Fox News reporters and producers
March 10, 2007: Harry Reid: Harry Reid, D-NV, said today that the Nevada State Democrat Party’s decision to pull out of a scheduled presidential debate co-hosted by Fox News is “actually a strategic redeployment, not a cut-and-run retreat.”

___________________________________ 

"Tax the rich" is a basically unstable way of governing - The NYT

I figure that a mainstream

I figure that a mainstream news source is probably being fair and accurate if they piss me off about half the time on matters about which I have a strong opinion. Which is about the Fox rate. Whereas a typical Lib things a mainstream news source is being fair and accurate if they never ever disagree with them.

Sssshhhh. . .don't tell the brothers

Back in my Bad Old Leftist days, I never believed a news story until I saw it reported by Dan Rather on CBS.  Even then I knew the media were biased. . .but that was OK b/c they had the right bias. 

My aversion to CNN, NYT, etc. now is seen as some sort of eccentricity by my religious brothers!  I don't dare tell them that I read Newbusters and watch Fox!  :-)

Fr. Philip, OP

Harumph!

Better watch it, Father. Next thing you know you'll be turning the altar back around, saying the pre-1962 Latin Mass, calling "Reconciliation" Confession, and, God forbid, even listening to that old Aquinas fellow...

It's a slippery slope, I tell you :)

JMJ

Survey conducted in late

Survey conducted in late July (nearly 2 months ago)? Embargoed for release at 11 PM EDT Sunday night?

Huh? What's that all about?

___________________________________ 

"Tax the rich" is a basically unstable way of governing - The NYT

As favorable as this is, in

As favorable as this is, in terms of how it appears that the voting public may finally be waking up to the bias of the msm, I still find some of these numbers shocking.  Like 55 percent of Republicans are favorably disposed to news on ABC, CBS and NBC. What can 55% of the Republicans polled possibly find favorable about the reporting on these networks? We're talking about Brian Williams, Charlie Gibson, and Katie Couric, for cryin' out loud!  They, and all of their roving reporters are in the tank for everything that is liberal and socialistic. They are Obama mouthpieces!  

New York Times......

 When the survey shows that only 39% of Democrats find the Times favorable, (16% Republicans), can we presume that most Americans view the Times as a politically slanted and biased paper?  With "trust" in the news media at an all-time low, we can all thank weblogs such as Newsbusters to provide factual information to make our own conclusions, while the New York Times has relegated itself to something worse than tabloid journalism.  I look forward to the day when writers like Krugman, Rich, and Dowd are standing in unemployment lines wondering how they got there.

Rovin

Is anyone HERE surprised?

This is directed to those (my fave rant) cowards who are the repeaters - you guys only know how to repeat the agenda from the administration, probably due to your lack of ethics and work attitude, being easier to repeat what someone, who thinks like you, happens to release, and far easier then thnking or considering that there are 2 sides to EVERY story. However, you folks have gone done this path for so long, there is no turning back, having your minds so entrenched in liberal though, you can't realize there is another, more constructive manner of thinking. (or thinking in the first place)

On an other front- why do you guys (the so-called media) let the O-man get away with statements that the GOP is is holding up his view of healthcare? - HE HAS THE VOTES - you dummies - if his ideas  are so great, why doesn't he just push it through?

 

Proud member of the MOB - Move Over Barack, we want our country back! 

There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V

 Of course, this would be

 Of course, this would be Bill Keller's (NYT's) reaction to the poll:  blame it on the alternative media.

Without recognizing the ordinances of Heaven, it is impossible to be a superior man. - Confucious

His response was infantile

His response was infantile and typical of the mindset that is killing his organization. The NYT refuses to take responsibility or hold itself accountable.  But that's ok, the market is doing that for them.

G MAY...

 BINGO!! You are exactly right, people like Keller (or the others running other failing MSM outlets) will never own up to their problems & admit they are the problem. So when the NYSlimes goes under(& I think it will)there will be a million "what happened?" stories. Every one of those stories from far left outlets will not blame the Slime's liberal bias & elitist attitude.

Same for the 3 networks, I can only guess what they will say about why their broadcasts have been bleeding viewership over the years, soon they will be gone too. They will point at others for their demise, they should look in a mirror.

 

 

"...How blind can you be, don't you see...

...that the gambler lost all he does not have..."  

Nightwish

His response is a textbook

His response is a textbook example of denial--with maybe a little anger thrown in, as he moves to the next stage of reality.

No citizen's right to life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, or property is safe as long as Obama is President of the United States.

Bingo. The same can be

Bingo.

The same can be said for the purveyors. They don't know how liberal they are because:

1. so out of touch. Insulated in experience, geography, social networks and especially education.

2. they are educated, but not smart. Like savants, they have no social IQ. 

Most news organizations are

Most news organizations are located deep in Manhattan and most reporters live there as well.  Many are spoiled little rich kids who've always lived there - or in some other insulated place.  Manhattan is its own little liberal world and you may note the occasional medium-sized local (to NY) story that gets a lot more attention on the national news than a larger one in Texas or Kentucky would. 

It is the same issue with the attitudes of these reporters.  They're on this little island and think of the rest of the country as being beneath them. 

Then again, CNN is in Atlanta - so I'm not sure what their excuse is.  Journalism as a major in college tends to attract spoiled little libs, I guess.

All I know is that it's time to clean house.  We've gone from the gentle, subconscious bias of Cronkite to out and out propaganda.  Completely unabashed favoritism and editing of the news to fit the leftist political agenda.  It's dangerous and it needs to be outed and stopped.  Drive these idiots out of business!! 

I have just one question: Who are these 34% of Republicans who

have a favorable opinion of MSNBC?

-----------------------------------------------------------

“Nobody believes what the mainstream media says now anyway.  Except the uneducated, the illiterate, and the uninformed -- which, sadly, is a fairly large number” ~ Rush Limbaugh

 

RUSH FAN...

 My guess...Republicans from Maine. They don't seem to undestand conservatism, but they think they are Republicans.

 

"...How blind can you be, don't you see...

...that the gambler lost all he does not have..."  

Nightwish