Today, where does the average American get their daily news from? Why are they dependent on one or two sources more than ever before? Are they interested in “objective journalism” or simply seeking out opinions that confirm their biases — known as “confirmation bias”?
Today we know that people get their news from various media sources: including traditional print media such as newspapers, television and talk radio, and increasingly over internet media such as that found on Facebook and Google. These internet and non-print sources have especially hurt print newspapers. The verifying evidence is certainly there:
- The loss of classified ads to non-print sources has hurt newspaper advertising revenue, which dropped from $63.5 billion to $23 billion from 2000 to 2013, according to the Brookings Institution.
- According to PewResearchCenter, by 2016 the newspaper industry’s ad revenue was nearly a third of what it was a decade before, falling to US$18 billion from US$49 billion.
- Moreover, subscriber and advertiser revenue for traditional print journalism has been in free fall, and many think it started when newspapers offered content online for free.
- In 1990, daily and weekly newspaper publishers employed about 455,000 people, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. By January 2016, that number had fallen to 173,000.
In the 1990s, publishing online became easy, which led to a surge of independent digital publications that produced original content while also re-reporting news from other outlets with a little bit of analysis added. This transformation has greatly affected mainstream media sources in particular.
As for television, many people are still tuning in to certain news outlets that tend to confirm their views. In June and July of this year for example, it was reported that Fox News was the highest-rated television channel in the prime-time hours of 8 to 11 p.m. Not just on cable. Not just among news networks. All of television. Fox News ratings demonstrate the size and resilience of America’s audience for pro-Trump opinion, and the loyalty of Fox News viewers who shrug off the numerous controversies that routinely swirl around the network. Whatever news source one watches, the reality is that the press has more often than not been openly biased in one way or another. Although actual journalists are taught to be objective, the fact of the matter is that their interpretation of the news will most often be viewed as being biased by individuals with preconceived political and social perspectives.
Indeed, the overall opinions of American journalists have worsened in recent years, as reflected in a general trend of public animosity toward journalists that bubbled up during the 2016 presidential campaign. Ivy Kaplan of the Globe Post writes, “A climate of hatred and hostility towards journalists in the United States has become significantly worse,” pointing to a sobering Reporters Without Borders report in 2018 that rated the U.S. as the sixth-most-lethal place in the world to practice journalism. Studies have found that that Republicans in particular don’t like or trust the news media. In Canada, the same can be said about conservatives who often refer to the “liberal media” in condescending terms.
“Objective journalism” appears to depend on the preconceptions of those who interpret the news. Journalism is not just about uncovering the facts and reporting on one’s findings, it is also about how the journalist presents them. Failure to appreciate this reality can mean the collapse of a news source if there is no longer a receptive audience. In this age of ready access and instant media sources, people want a quick and dirty accounting and interpretation of events in some easy to access presentation. The decline of traditional print media is just one obvious victim of this phenomenon.
FROLITICKS 