The Survey Says...
The Pew Research Center for People and the Press is out with a new survey about where we're going for news and why and at least one of the findings in a little surprising to me. Pew says Americans are spending more time following the news.
Meanwhile, the Gallup organization has its own research that shows that Americans are less confident than ever in what they are getting from newspapers and television. Fewer than 25% of those surveyed by Gallup say they have "a great deal" or "quite a lot" of confidence in newspapers or TV. That number represents a 10% decline over the last five years or so.
Conclusion: we are more interested than ever in what is going on and we have less belief than ever that what we see and read is the straight scoop.
The Pew survey also seems to buttress a contention of mine that news organizations are more and more appealing on a purely ideological basis. This is the news of the future, but really is a return to the past when political ideology sharply defined newspapers and magazines.
A liberal - defined, for example, in the Pew survey as one who supports gay rights - tends, big surprise, to like the New York Times and National Public Radio. Supporters of the National Rifle Association and the Tea Party are big listeners to Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Fox News. Libertarians like the Wall Street Journal. Pew also reports that more and more of us are using digital means to keep up on the world and younger Americans, those under 30, are fast forgetting what a newspaper is all about. More affluent and well-educated Americans, again big surprise, tend to shop around more using digital, print and broadcast sources for their information. Could be that they just have the time and ability to do so.
It may be a stretch to connect these two interesting surveys to some recent musings by former President Bill Clinton, but here goes. During a recent extended interview with the Times - former presidents do extended interviews, apparently - Clinton identified his favorite TV commercial of the last five years as the ESPN spot were the math nerds make fun of the jocks spewing sports stats in the high school cafeteria.
Clinton was making the point that the clever spot is a metaphor for American political life. Namely, if we cared as much about the "hard facts" that pertain to public policy as we do about football, it would be a better, at least in Clinton's view, for Democrats.
Facts are good things, but Clinton, of all people, should know that politics is much more often - like football - about emotion, feeling and raw execution. I feel Clinton's pain about the need for more focus on "hard facts" in our consumption of news, but, upon further reflection, the former president just might not be the best messenger for the "hard facts" approach to public life.
The reality of the moment is - and this is the truth - that we often place more emphasis in developing our positions on what Stephen Colbert has called "truthiness." What we believe may not really be true, but it seems close enough, particularly when we factor in our emotions and ideology.
By the way, the Pew survey finds that among those 30 and younger, "about as many young people regularly watch the Daily Show (13%) and the Colbert Report (13%) as watch the national network evening news (14%) and the morning news shows (12%)."
Sounds about right. There is an element of "truthiness" in there somewhere. Just ask Rachel Maddow or Bill O'Reilly.
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
Looking More, Believing Less
The Survey Says...
The Pew Research Center for People and the Press is out with a new survey about where we're going for news and why and at least one of the findings in a little surprising to me. Pew says Americans are spending more time following the news.
Meanwhile, the Gallup organization has its own research that shows that Americans are less confident than ever in what they are getting from newspapers and television. Fewer than 25% of those surveyed by Gallup say they have "a great deal" or "quite a lot" of confidence in newspapers or TV. That number represents a 10% decline over the last five years or so.
Conclusion: we are more interested than ever in what is going on and we have less belief than ever that what we see and read is the straight scoop.
The Pew survey also seems to buttress a contention of mine that news organizations are more and more appealing on a purely ideological basis. This is the news of the future, but really is a return to the past when political ideology sharply defined newspapers and magazines.
A liberal - defined, for example, in the Pew survey as one who supports gay rights - tends, big surprise, to like the New York Times and National Public Radio. Supporters of the National Rifle Association and the Tea Party are big listeners to Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Fox News. Libertarians like the Wall Street Journal. Pew also reports that more and more of us are using digital means to keep up on the world and younger Americans, those under 30, are fast forgetting what a newspaper is all about. More affluent and well-educated Americans, again big surprise, tend to shop around more using digital, print and broadcast sources for their information. Could be that they just have the time and ability to do so.
It may be a stretch to connect these two interesting surveys to some recent musings by former President Bill Clinton, but here goes. During a recent extended interview with the Times - former presidents do extended interviews, apparently - Clinton identified his favorite TV commercial of the last five years as the ESPN spot were the math nerds make fun of the jocks spewing sports stats in the high school cafeteria.
Clinton was making the point that the clever spot is a metaphor for American political life. Namely, if we cared as much about the "hard facts" that pertain to public policy as we do about football, it would be a better, at least in Clinton's view, for Democrats.
Facts are good things, but Clinton, of all people, should know that politics is much more often - like football - about emotion, feeling and raw execution. I feel Clinton's pain about the need for more focus on "hard facts" in our consumption of news, but, upon further reflection, the former president just might not be the best messenger for the "hard facts" approach to public life.
The reality of the moment is - and this is the truth - that we often place more emphasis in developing our positions on what Stephen Colbert has called "truthiness." What we believe may not really be true, but it seems close enough, particularly when we factor in our emotions and ideology.
By the way, the Pew survey finds that among those 30 and younger, "about as many young people regularly watch the Daily Show (13%) and the Colbert Report (13%) as watch the national network evening news (14%) and the morning news shows (12%)."
Sounds about right. There is an element of "truthiness" in there somewhere. Just ask Rachel Maddow or Bill O'Reilly.
Posts
