For the second time in a decade, the believability ratings for major news organizations have suffered broad-based declines. In the new survey, positive believability ratings have fallen significantly for nine of 13 news organizations tested. This follows a similar downturn in positive believability ratings that occurred between 2002 and 2004.

The falloff in credibility affects news organizations in most sectors: national newspapers, such as the New York Times and USA Today, all three cable news outlets, as well as the broadcast TV networks and NPR.

Across all 13 news organizations included in the survey, the average positive believability rating (3 or 4 on a 4-point scale) is 56%. In 2010, the average positive rating was 62%. A decade ago, the average rating for the news organizations tested was 71%. Since 2002, every news outlet’s believability rating has suffered a double-digit drop, except for local daily newspapers and local TV news. The New York Times was not included in this survey until 2004, but its believability rating has fallen by 13 points since then.

These are among the major findings of a survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, conducted July 19-22 among 1,001 adults. The survey asks people to rate individual news organizations on believability using a 4-point scale. A rating of 4 means someone believes “all or most” of what the news organization says; a rating of 1 means someone believes “almost nothing” of what they say.

The believability ratings for individual news organizations – like views of the news media generally – have long been divided along partisan lines. But partisan differences have grown as Republicans’ views of the credibility of news outlets have continued to erode. Today, there are only two news organizations – Fox News and local TV news – that receive positive believability ratings from at least two-thirds of Republicans. A decade ago, there were only two news organizations that did not get positive ratings from at least two-thirds of Republicans. By contrast, Democrats generally rate the believability of news organizations positively; majorities of Democrats give all the news organizations tested ratings of 3 or 4 on the 4-point scale, with the exception of Fox News.

Current Believability Ratings

The Pew Research Center has asked about the believability of individual news organizations for more than two decades. During this period, the Center also has asked separately about the news media’s overall performance; ratings for the news media’s accuracy, fairness and other aspects of performance also have shown long-term declines. (For the most recent report, see “Press Widely Criticized, But Trusted More than Other Information Sources,” Sept. 22, 2011.)

The believability measures are based on those who give each news organization a rating. Roughly one-in-five are unable to rate the believability of NPR (21%), the New York Times (19%), the Wall Street Journal (19%) and USA Today (17%).

As in past believability surveys, local TV news and the CBS News program 60 Minutes receive the most positive ratings. Nearly two-thirds (65%) of those able to rate local TV news give it a rating of 3 or 4. Ratings are comparable for 60 Minutes (64% 3 or 4).

Despite the declines in believability, majorities continue to give most news organizations ratings of 3 or 4. However, ratings are mixed for NPR, MSNBC, the New York Times, Fox News and USA Today. About half give each of these news organizations believability ratings of 3 or 4; approximately the same percentages give them ratings of 1 or 2.

Believability of News Organizations: 2002-2012

Positive believability ratings for the New York Times have fallen by nine points since 2010, from 58% to 49%. The decline has been comparable for USA Today. Two years ago, 56% rated USA Today’s believability at 3 or 4; today 49% do so.

About six-in-ten (58%) rate the Wall Street Journal’s believability positively. That is little changed since 2010 (62%), but in 2002, 77% rated the Journal’s believability at 3 or 4 on the 4-point scale.

Perceptions of the believability of the daily newspaper “you are most familiar with” are about the same as they were two years ago. Currently, 57% give their daily newspaper a positive believability rating, which is little changed from 2010 (59%).

Believability ratings for all three major cable news outlets have declined since 2010. MSNBC’s believability rating has fallen from 60% to 50%, while the percentages giving CNN and Fox News believability ratings of 3 or 4 have declined seven points each, to 58% and 49%, respectively. In 2002, the ratings for all three cable news outlets were considerably higher – 76% for CNN, 73% for MSNBC and 67% for Fox News.

The believability ratings for local TV news are higher than those for the three cable news outlets. Currently, 65% give local news a rating of 3 or 4. Since 2002, credibility ratings for local TV news have remained more stable than have ratings for the three main cable news outlets.

There also have been slight declines since 2010 in believability ratings for the three major TV networks — ABC News, CBS News and NBC News. Over the past decade, positive ratings for all three have fallen from the low 70s to the mid- to high-50s. More than six-in-ten (64%) give the CBS weekly newsmagazine 60 Minutes believability ratings of 3 or 4. That is down 13 points since 2002.

Since 2010, the percentage giving NPR believability ratings of 3 or 4 has dropped eight points to 52%. NPR’s believability ratings had changed little from 2002 to 2010; about six-in-ten in each year rated NPR’s believability positively.

Partisan Gaps in Credibility Ratings

Republicans have long held a more negative view of the credibility of the news media than Democrats and this continues to be reflected in current assessments of news outlets. Republicans rate the believability of nine of 13 news organizations less positively than do Democrats. Fox News is the only news organization that is rated higher for believability by Republicans (67% of Republicans vs. 37% of Democrats). However, the percentage of Republicans giving Fox a believability rating of 3 or 4 has fallen 10 points, from 77%, since 2010.

Partisan differences in believability ratings are more pronounced for broadcast and cable TV news organizations, with more modest gaps for most newspapers.

More than twice as many Democrats as Republicans rate MSNBC’s believability positively (69% vs. 32%). The differences are about as large in views of the believability of CNN and the three broadcast networks.

The partisan divide in views of the New York Times’ believability also is substantial; 65% of Democrats, but just 37% of Republicans, rate the believability of the Times at 3 or 4. However, there are smaller differences in views of other newspapers. More Democrats (65%) than Republicans (49%) give positive ratings for the newspaper they know best, but about as many Republicans as Democrats rate the believability of the Wall Street Journal and USA Today positively.

A majority of Democrats (59%) give NPR a believability rating of 3 or 4. That compares with 48% of Republicans.

The partisan differences in views of the believability of most news organizations have increased greatly since 2002. For example, the partisan gap in believability of each of the cable networks was only about 10 points a decade ago; today, the gaps in believability ratings for Fox News, MSNBC and CNN are at least 30 points.

Negative opinions about the performance of news organizations now equal or surpass all-time highs on nine of 12 core measures the Pew Research Center has been tracking since 1985. However, these bleak findings are put into some perspective by the fact that news organizations are more trusted sources of information than are many other institutions, including government and business.

Further, people rate the performance of the news organizations they rely on much more positively than they rate the performance of news organizations generally.

And the public’s impressions of the national media may be influenced more by their opinions of cable news outlets than their views of other news sources, such as network or local TV news, newspapers or internet news outlets. When asked what first comes to mind when they think of “news organizations,” most name a cable news outlet, with CNN and Fox News receiving the most mentions by far.

The Pew Research Center for the People & the Press has been tracking views of press performance since 1985, and the overall ratings remain quite negative. Fully 66% say news stories often are inaccurate, 77% think that news organizations tend to favor one side, and 80% say news organizations are often influenced by powerful people and organizations.

The widely-shared belief that news stories are inaccurate cuts to the press’s core mission: Just 25% say that in general news organizations get the facts straight while 66% say stories are often inaccurate. As recently as four years ago, 39% said news organizations mostly get the facts straight and 53% said stories are often inaccurate.

But Americans have a very different view of the news sources they rely on than they do of the news media generally. When asked to rate the accuracy of stories from the sources where they get most of their news, the percentage saying  these outlets get the facts straight more than doubles. Fully 62% say their main news sources get the facts straight, while just 30% say stories are often inaccurate.

The biennial news attitudes survey was conducted July 20-24 among 1,501 adults nationwide, with supplemental data collected on other, smaller surveys in June, July and August. These surveys find that while the public holds news organizations in low regard, they are more trusted as a source of information than are federal, state and local governments, the Obama administration and business corporations.

Nearly seven-in-ten (69%) say they have a lot or some trust in information they get from local news organizations, while 59% say they trust information from national news organizations.

By comparison, about half say they have a lot or some trust in information provided by their state government (51%) and the Obama administration (50%). Smaller percentages trust information from federal agencies (44%), business corporations (41%), Congress (37%) or candidates running for office (29%).

Overall, television continues to be the public’s main source for national and international news. Currently, 66% say they get most of their news from television, while 43% cite the internet as their main news source. While this is little changed from last year, over the long term the gap between TV and the internet has narrowed: Four years ago, roughly three times as many people cited TV than the internet as their main source of national and international news (74% vs. 24%).

Despite the growth of internet news, it is clear that television news outlets, specifically cable news outlets, are central to people’s impressions of the news media. When asked what first comes to mind when they think of news organizations, 63% volunteer the name of a cable news outlet, with CNN and Fox News by far the most prevalent in people’s minds. Only about a third (36%) name one of the broadcast networks. Fewer than one-in-five mention local news outlets and only 5% mention a national newspaper such as the New York Times, Wall Street Journal or USA Today. Just 3% name a website – either web-only or linked to a traditional news organization – when asked what comes to mind when they think of news organizations.

The survey finds that the growth in negative attitudes toward the news media in recent years in several key areas has come among Democrats and independents. Since Barack Obama took office, the proportion of Democrats saying that news stories are often inaccurate has risen sharply, and they are now nearly as critical as Republicans.

In 2007, 43% of Democrats and 56% of independents said stories were often inaccurate. Since then, the percentage of Democrats expressing skepticism about the accuracy of news reports has increased by 21 points to 64%, and the percentage of independents saying this has grown by 10 points. Republican views have held fairly steady: 69% see stories as often inaccurate, little changed from four years ago (63%).

While the press’s overall reputation in many areas has declined, majorities continue to say that news organizations care about how good a job they do (62%) and are highly professional (57%). However, these evaluations also have slipped somewhat since 2007.

The public also continues to view press criticism of political leaders as a check on possible wrongdoing. A majority (58%) says “such criticism is worth it because it keeps political leaders from doing things that should not be done.” Just a quarter (25%) say that press criticism of political leaders keeps them “from doing their job.”

Partisan differences in views of the press’s watchdog role have disappeared in recent years. In 2007, during the Bush administration, 71% of Democrats and just 44% of Republicans said press criticism of political leaders was worth it because it kept them from doing things that should not be done. In 2009, after Obama took office, somewhat more Republicans (65%) than Democrats (55%) favored a watchdog role for the press. In the new survey, nearly identical percentages of Republicans (59%), Democrats (58%) and independents (58%) support the watchdog role.

The survey finds that most Americans prefer news with no political point of view, and this feeling is particularly widespread when it comes to getting news online. Fully 74% of online news consumers say they prefer internet sources that do not have a political point of view. Just 19% prefer sources that have a political point of view.

Social networking has expanded the ways in which the public gets news and information. About a quarter (27%) of adults say they regularly or sometimes get news or news headlines through Facebook, Twitter or other social networking sites. This rises to 38% of people younger than 30, but now spans a notable share of older Americans (12% of those 65 and older) as well.

Most of those who get news from social networks (72%) say they mostly just get the same news and information they would get elsewhere. Just 27% say the news they get over social networking sites is different than the news they get elsewhere. And when asked to describe what they like about getting news over social networks and Twitter, answers range from features of the technology such as speed, portability and brevity to ways in which the content is more customized, personal and topical.

Broad Criticism of Press Performance

While the public has long been critical of many aspects of the press’s performance, negative attitudes are at record levels in a number of areas. The percentage saying news organizations are often influenced by powerful people and organizations has reached an all-time high of 80%.

Other measures, including the press’s perceived lack of fairness (77%), its unwillingness to admit mistakes (72%), inaccurate reporting (66%) and political bias (63%) match highs reached in 2009.

The public is about evenly divided over whether news organizations are immoral (42%) or moral (38%), but the proportion saying the press is immoral also equals an all-time high.

On the positive side, majorities continue to say that news organizations care about how good a job they do (62%) and are highly professional (57%). However, the percentage saying news organizations do not care about how good a job they do (31%) is at an all-time high, while the percentage saying they are not professional (32%) equals its previous high, reached in 1999.

Long-Term Views of the Press

In the Pew Research Center’s first survey on news attitudes in 1985, majorities said that news organizations were often influenced by powerful people and organizations (53%) and tended to favor one side (53%). However, by a 55% to 34% margin, more Americans said that news organizations get the facts straight than said their stories were often inaccurate.

Opinions of news organizations in all three areas have grown more negative since then. And since 2007, there have been increases in the percentages saying that news stories are often inaccurate (from 53% to 66%), that news organizations are often influenced by the powerful (from 69% to 80%), and that news organizations tend to favor one side (from 66% to 77%).

Most Say News Organizations Are Highly Professional

A majority (57%) views news organizations as highly professional, while 32% say they are not professional. However, the percentage saying news organizations are not professional has risen 10 points since 2007.

About six-in-ten (62%) say news organizations care about how good a job they do. However, just 18% think the media is willing to admit their mistakes; this is little changed from 2009 (21%).

By two-to-one (62% to 31%), more Americans say that news organizations are politically biased than say they are careful to avoid biased reporting. These views have changed only modestly in recent years. During the mid-1980s, far fewer said news organizations were politically biased; in Pew Research’s first news attitudes survey, 45% said news organizations were politically biased while 36% said they were careful that their reporting was not politically biased.

The news media also is faulted for invading people’s privacy and focusing too much attention on bad news, but these opinions have not become more negative over the past quarter century. In the current survey, 69% say news organizations invade people’s privacy, while 24% say they respect people’s privacy. In 1985, about as many (73%) said the press invaded people’s privacy.

About two-thirds of Americans (66%) say news organizations pay too much attention to bad news, while 24% say news organizations report the kinds of stories they should be covering and just 3% say the media pay too much attention to good news. These opinions have varied little over the past decade.

More See Press Hurting Democracy

For the first time in a Pew Research Center survey, as many say that news organizations hurt democracy (42%) as protect democracy (42%). In the mid-1980s, about twice as many said that news organizations protect democracy rather than hurt democracy.

The public also is divided over whether news organizations stand up for America (41%) or are too critical of America (39%). These opinions have changed little in recent years, but in 2002 and 2003 somewhat more said that news organizations stand up for America.

Yet majorities have consistently expressed the view that criticism of political leaders by news organizations keeps them from doing things that should not be done. Today, 58% say this, while just 25% say that the news media’s criticism keeps political leaders from doing their jobs. Even as attitudes toward the press have grown more negative, support for the press’s watchdog role has remained stable.

Partisan Perceptions of the News Media

Over the past decade, Republicans have been more critical of the press’s performance than have independents or Democrats. But partisan differences in a number of areas have narrowed in recent years.

Views of media accuracy and independence have become much more uniform across partisan groups, as Democrats and independents express increasingly critical views. Since 2007, the percentage of Democrats saying news organizations are often influenced by powerful people and organizations has grown by 12 points; there has been a comparable increase among independents (14 points). Meanwhile, Republicans’ views have shown less change.

Even on issues where there continue to be substantial partisan differences, such as in views of political bias and whether the media is too critical of America, the gaps have narrowed.

Three-quarters of Republicans (76%) say news organizations are politically biased, a view shared by 54% of Democrats. In 2007, 70% of Republicans but only 39% of Democrats said the press was politically biased. Views on this question among independents have changed little (63% now, 61% in 2007).

Four years ago, Republicans were much more likely than Democrats to view the news media as too critical of America (63% vs. 23%). But in the current survey, far fewer Republicans (49%) say this, while the proportion of Democrats that see the press as too critical of America has grown eight points to 31%.

Democrats (64%) and independents (66%) now are about as likely as Republicans (69%) to say news media produce inaccurate stories, a notable shift from just a few years ago, when Democrats and independents had more faith in media accuracy. Partisan gaps on these two issues had been as high as 21 points for inaccuracy and 17 points for influence, but the divides have narrowed to 5 points and 4 points, respectively.

Media Trusted More than Other Sources

Despite their declining assessments of news media, Americans say they trust the information they get from news organizations more than they trust information they get from other places, including government and business sources.

The public is most inclined to believe information from local news organizations: 69% say they trust such information a lot (17%) or some (52%). Almost six-in-ten (59%) say the same about national news organizations: 14% say they trust a lot of what they learn from the national media, while 45% say they have some trust in information provided by national news organizations.

By comparison, Americans are about evenly divided over whether they trust information from the Obama administration: 50% say they trust it a lot or some, while 48% have not much or no trust in administration information. The public also is about evenly split over whether they trust information from their state governments (51% a lot or some, 47% not much or not at all). Fewer trust information from federal government agencies, business corporations or Congress. Just about three-in-ten trust a lot (1%) or some (28%) of what they learn from candidates running for office.

There are no partisan differences in how much people trust national or local news organizations.  About six-in-ten Republicans (62%), Democrats (60%) and independents (58%) say they trust a lot or some of the information they get from national news organizations. Figures are higher for local media: 75% of Republicans, 68% of Democrats and 69% of independents trust at least some of the information they get from local news outlets.

However, among Republicans and Republican-leaning independents, those who agree with the Tea Party movement express more skepticism about national media trustworthiness than do those who disagree or have no opinion of the Tea Party. Almost half of Tea Party supporters (47%) say they do not trust information from national news organizations much or at all, compared with only 31% of those who do not agree with the Tea Party or offer no opinion of it. There is no difference by Tea Party support when it comes to trust in local news organizations.

Older Americans are notably less likely to trust information from national news media: 47% say they trust information from national news organizations a lot or some; about six-in-ten in all other age groups say the same.

Most Consider Their News Sources to Be More Accurate

Despite their negative views about the press and the accuracy and fairness of its reports, most people say they are able to find news that is accurate. About six-in-ten (62%) say the news sources they use most generally get the facts straight; by comparison, just 25% say that news organizations generally get the facts straight.

While the vast majority of people say the press, as a whole, tends to favor one side (77%), the public is divided over whether the sources they rely on most deal fairly with all sides or not. About half (49%) say the news sources they use most tend to favor one side, but about as many (45%) say their choice sources treat all sides fairly.

There are only modest partisan differences in people’s views of the accuracy and independence of the news sources they use most.

TV Still Top News Source

The public’s top two sources of news remain television and the internet. Two-thirds of Americans (66%) say television is where they get most of their news about national and international events, while 43% say they turn to the internet. About three-in-ten Americans (31%) say they get most of their national and international news from newspapers. Radio was a distant fourth choice, with 19% saying they turned to it for news. (People were allowed to name up to two sources).

Television has dominated news consumption since the question was first asked in 1991, though the proportion naming it as a main source has declined over the past two decades. Throughout the 1990s and into the early 2000s, about eight-in-ten named television as their main source of national and international news.

The top sources of TV news are the Fox News Channel, cited by 19% of the public, CNN (15%), and local news programming (16%).

Audiences for the Fox News Channel remain divided along partisan lines. About a third of Republicans (34%) cite Fox as their main source of national and international news, compared with 17% of independents and 9% of Democrats. This is little changed from 2009. Over the same period, the total audience for CNN, meanwhile, has declined from 22% of the public to 15%. Most of that decline has come among Democrats (down 10 points) and independents (down 6 points).

Television also is the most frequently cited source of local news, with 59% citing it as a main source. Newspapers are cited more often as a source of local (39%) than national news (31%). By contrast, just 17% cite the internet as their top source of local news, less than half the percentage citing the internet as their main source of national and international news (43%). The internet is on par with radio (14%) as a local news source.

There continue to be large age differences in the main sources for national news. Among those younger than 30, the internet far surpasses television as the main source for national and international news (65% vs. 51%). Television is the most frequently named source for older age groups, though the gap is fairly modest among those 30 to 49 (61% television vs. 51% internet).

Those 65 and older are only age group in which more cite newspapers (49%) than the internet (15%) as a main national news source. The internet is cited about as often as newspapers by those 50 to 64 (36% internet, 33% newspapers), and far more often by younger people.

Age differences are less pronounced in the leading sources of local news; majorities across all age groups cite television as their main source. Those under 50 are far more likely than older Americans to say they get local news from the internet, though only about quarter (23%) do so.

Across all groups, newspapers are mentioned more often as a source for local than national news. The difference is particularly notable among those younger than 30 – 37% say they rely on newspapers for local news compared with 24% who cite newspapers as a main source for national and international news.

When asked about the number of news sources available, 37% say the number of national news sources is growing while far fewer (13%) see the number of sources as shrinking; 47% say the number is staying the same. However, about as many say the number of local news sources is shrinking (21%) as growing (19%); 55% say the number is staying the same.

Those younger than 30 are much more likely to say the number of national news sources is growing (47%) than are those 65 and older (29%). This may be related to young people’s greater reliance on the internet for national news.

Searching For News Online: Google, Yahoo Popular Destinations

About half of internet news users (51%) say that when they last looked for news on a specific topic or story on the internet, they went first to a website that offers links to stories from many news organizations; 43% say they went directly to the website of one of their favorite news organizations.

Among all internet users, search engine sites were the most popular place to look for news about a story or topic, with 21% citing Google and 14% citing Yahoo. CNN is the most popular news-organization website for searching, overall, offered by 13% of all internet news users.

Among those whose last news searches took them first to a favorite news organization, CNN tops the list, with 22% citing it, followed by local news sites (13%). Yahoo and Fox also are popular options (10% each). Among those who went first to a site with links to other sites, Google was the most popular first destination, with more than a third naming it (35%), followed by Yahoo at 17%.

Most Want News with No Political Point of View

More than six-in-ten Americans (63%) say they prefer news sources with no particular point of view, while 29% prefer sources that have a political point of view. The preference for news without a political point of view is even stronger when it comes to online news: 74% of those who get news online want it to come without a political point of view, while just 19% prefer online sources that have a point of view.

About as many Democrats (35%) as Republicans (31%) say they want news with a political point of view; 24% of independents say this. The partisan differences are more pronounced for online news: 32% of Democrats prefer online news with a political point of view, but just 16% of Republicans and 14% of independents want the same.

Even when the public has been asked whether they want news from their point of view, the clear preference is that the news have no particular point of view. In Pew Research’s 2010 media consumption survey, 62% said they wanted news with no particular point of view while just 25% wanted news from their point of view.

There are many more ways to get the news these days, and as a consequence Americans are spending more time with the news than over much of the past decade. Digital platforms are playing a larger role in news consumption, and they seem to be more than making up for modest declines in the audience for traditional platforms. As a result, the average time Americans spend with the news on a given day is as high as it was in the mid-1990s, when audiences for traditional news sources were much larger.

Roughly a third (34%) of the public say they went online for news yesterday – on par with radio, and slightly higher than daily newspapers. And when cell phones, email, social networks and podcasts are added in, 44% of Americans say they got news through one or more internet or mobile digital source yesterday.

At the same time, the proportion of Americans who get news from traditional media platforms – television, radio and print – has been stable or edging downward in the last few years. There has been no overall decline in the percentage saying they watched news on television, and even with the continued erosion of print newspaper and radio audiences, three-quarters of Americans got news yesterday from one or more of these three traditional platforms.

In short, instead of replacing traditional news platforms, Americans are increasingly integrating new technologies into their news consumption habits. More than a third (36%) of Americans say they got news from both digital and traditional sources yesterday, just shy of the number who relied solely on traditional sources (39%). Only 9% of Americans got news through the internet and mobile technology without also using traditional sources.

The net impact of digital platforms supplementing traditional sources is that Americans are spending more time with the news than was the case a decade ago. As was the case in 2000, people now say they spend 57 minutes on average getting the news from TV, radio or newspapers on a given day. But today, they also spend an additional 13 minutes getting news online, increasing the total time spent with the news to 70 minutes. This is one of the highest totals on this measure since the mid-1990s and it does not take into account time spent getting news on cell phones or other digital devices .

The biennial news consumption survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, conducted June 8-28 on cell phones and landlines among 3,006 adults, finds further evidence that the combination of digital and traditional platforms is leading to increased news consumption.

The groups that are driving the increase in time spent with the news – particularly highly educated people – are most likely to use digital and traditional platforms. Fully 69% of those with some post-graduate experience got news through a digital source yesterday; this also is the group that showed the largest rise in time spent with the news from 2006-2008 to 2010 (from 81 minutes yesterday to 96 minutes). There also has been a modest increase in time spent with the news among those 30 to 64 – but not among older and younger age groups.

Digital platforms are supplementing the news diets of news consumers, but there is little indication they are expanding the proportion of Americans who get news on a given day. The vast majority of Americans (83%) get news in one form or another as part of their daily life. But even when cell phones, podcasts, social networks, email, Twitter and RSS feeds are accounted for, 17% of Americans say they got no news yesterday, little changed from previous years.

Moreover, while young people are most likely to integrate new technologies into their daily lives, they are not using these sources to get news at higher rates than do older Americans. Rather, those in their 30s are the only age group in which a majority (57%) reports getting news on one or more digital platforms yesterday.

The integration of traditional and digital technology is common among those in older age groups as well. Nearly half (49%) of people in their 40s, and 44% of those between 50 and 64, got news through one or more digital modes yesterday – rates that are comparable to those 18 to 29 (48%). Digital news consumption is low only among those ages 65 and older, just 23% of whom used one or more digital modes for news yesterday.

Print Newspaper Decline Only Partially Offset by Online Readership

Only about one-in-four (26%) Americans say they read a newspaper in print yesterday, down from 30% two years ago and 38% in 2006. Meanwhile, online newspaper readership continues to grow and is offsetting some of the overall decline in readership. This year, 17% of Americans say they read something on a newspaper’s website yesterday, up from 13% in 2008 and 9% in 2006.

But the online audience is only partially stemming the decline in the share of Americans who turn to newspapers; even when all online newspaper readership is included, 37% of Americans report getting news from newspapers yesterday, virtually unchanged from 39% two years ago, but down from 43% in 2006. (These percentages still may miss some people who access newspaper content indirectly through secondary online sources such as news aggregators or search engines.)

In general, daily newspaper readers tend to be older on average than the general public, but the regular readership of some of the major national newspapers – USA Today, the Wall Street Journal, and especially the New York Times – defy this trend. More than half of regular USA Today and Wall Street Journal (55% each) readers are younger than 50 – a profile that largely matches the nation as a whole (roughly 55% of all adults are between 18 and 49). Fully two-thirds (67%) of regular New York Times readers are younger than 50, with a third (34%) younger than 30 – making its audience substantially younger than the national average (55% younger than 50, 23% younger than 30).

The young profile of the regular New York Times readership is undoubtedly linked to the paper’s success online. Nearly one-in-ten of internet users younger than 30 (8%) – and 6% of all internet users – volunteer the New York Times when asked to name a few of the websites they use most often to get news and information.

Cable News Audiences in Flux

Overall, cable news continues to play a significant role in peoples’ news habits – 39% say they regularly get news from a cable channel. But the proportions saying they regularly watch CNN, MSNBC and CNBC have slipped substantially from two years ago, during the presidential election.

Only Fox News has maintained its audience size, and this is because of the increasing number of Republicans who regularly get news there. Four-in-ten Republicans (40%) now say they regularly watch Fox News, up from 36% two years ago and just 18% a decade ago. Just 12% of Republicans regularly watch CNN, and just 6% regularly watch MSNBC.

As recently as 2002, Republicans were as likely to watch CNN (28%) as Fox News (25%). The share of Democrats who regularly watch CNN or Fox News has fallen from 2008.

In terms of specific programs, Fox News hosts Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck and Bill O’Reilly have succeeded in attracting conservative and attentive audiences. This is also the case for radio host Rush Limbaugh.

Most of those who regularly watch O’Reilly (63%) and Hannity (65%) are 50 or older; 44% of the public is 50 or older. By contrast, the Daily Show and Colbert Report have the youngest audiences of any outlet included in the survey. Large majorities of those who say they regularly watch the Colbert Report (80%) and the Daily Show (74%) are younger than 50; 55% of public is 18 to 49.

News Audiences’ Political Views

Ideology continues to be closely associated with people’s choice of certain news sources. Eight-in-ten Americans (80%) who regularly listen to Rush Limbaugh or watch Sean Hannity are conservative – roughly twice the national average of 36%. And at the other end of the spectrum, the New York Times, Keith Olbermann, the Daily Show, the Colbert Report and Rachel Maddow have regular audiences that include nearly twice the proportion of liberals than in the public.

News audiences also vary widely when it comes to opinions about current issues and topics. For instance, those who describe themselves as supporters of the Tea Party movement make up disproportionately large proportions of the audiences for Limbaugh’s radio show and Fox News opinion programs. This also is the case for supporters of the NRA (National Rifle Association).

By contrast, supporters of gay rights make up large shares of regular New York Times readers, viewers of the Colbert Report and NPR listeners. Several ideologically divergent news audiences – including Wall Street Journal readers and viewers of the Colbert Report and Glenn Beck show – include larger-than-average percentages of self-described libertarians.

News Outlets’ Appeal: From Breaking News to Entertainment

News audiences are drawn to different sources for different reasons. A substantial majority (64%) of regular CNN viewers say they turn to the network for the latest news and headlines; far fewer say they turn to CNN for in-depth reporting (10%), interesting views and opinions (6%) or entertainment (4%). Similarly, the main appeal of network evening news, USA Today and daily newspapers is the latest news and headlines.

Regular Fox News viewers offer somewhat different reasons for tuning into that network: 44% say they go to Fox for the latest news, but a sizable minority (22%) volunteers several reasons or say that all apply.

Regular readers of the Wall Street Journal and New York Times are drawn particularly by in-depth reporting; 37% and 33%, respectively, say they mostly read those papers for in-depth reporting, the highest percentages for any new outlet.

For the audiences of evening cable programs – whether liberal or conservative – interesting views and opinions are the primary appeal. That is the case for regular listeners of Rush Limbaugh as well, although many Limbaugh listeners cite multiple reasons or say that all apply.

For some news audiences, such as regular NPR listeners, no single reason stands out as to why people watch, read or listen: 28% of regular NPR listeners cite several, or all, of the reasons listed, while nearly as many say they listen for the latest news (21%) or for in-depth reporting (20%).

Entertainment is by far the biggest reason why regular viewers of the Colbert Report and the Daily Show tune into those programs; 53% of the regular Colbert audience and 43% of the Daily Show audience say they mostly watch those programs for entertainment. Yet entertainment also is a factor for many regular viewers of morning news shows (18%), readers of USA Today (16%) and other audiences.

Fewer Liberals Enjoying the News

Overall, the share of Americans who say keeping up with the news is something they enjoy a lot has dipped, from a consistent 52% in recent biennial news consumption surveys, including 2008, to 45% in 2010.

The decline is linked to partisanship and ideology: in 2008 67% of liberal Democrats said they enjoyed the news a lot, compared with just 45% today. By contrast, about as many conservative Republicans say they enjoy keeping up with the news today as did so two years ago (57% now, 56% then). This has resulted in a switch in news enjoyment. Today, conservative Republicans enjoy keeping up with the news more than any other ideological and partisan group; just two years ago it was the liberal Democrats who held that distinction.

Other Key Findings

•While 26% of all Americans say they read a print newspaper yesterday, that figure falls to just 8% among adults younger than 30.

•Far more men (50%) than women (39%) get news on digital platforms, such as the internet and mobile technology, on any given day. Men are more likely to get news by cell phone, email, RSS feeds or podcasts than are women. But men and women are equally likely to get news through Twitter or social networking sites.

•More people say they mostly get news “from time to time” rather than at “regular times.” The percentage of so-called news grazers has increased nine points (from 48% to 57%) since 2006.

•Search engines are playing a substantially larger role in people’s news gathering habits – 33% regularly use search engines to get news on topics of interest, up from 19% in 2008.

•About three-in-ten adults (31%) access the internet over their cell phone, but just 8% get news there regularly.

•Most Facebook and Twitter users say they hardly ever or never get news there.
•One-in-four adults (25%) who have Tivos or DVRs say they program them to record news programs.

•About eight-in-ten (82%) say they see at least some bias in news coverage; by a 43% to 23% margin, more say it is a liberal than a conservative bias.

•Roughly a third (35%) read a book yesterday, which is largely unchanged over the past decade. Of those, 4% read an electronic or digital book.

•The public struggled with a four-question current events quiz – just 14% answered all four correctly. But about half (51%) of regular Wall Street Journal readers aced the quiz, as did 42% of regular New York Times readers.

•Among news audiences, Obama gets his highest approval ratings among regular viewers of Keith Olbermann (84% approve) and Rachel Maddow (80%); his rating is nearly as high among regular readers of the New York Times (79%). Obama gets his lowest ratings among regular Sean Hannity viewers (7%) and Rush Limbaugh listeners (9%).

•Partisan gaps in media credibility continue to grow, with Republicans far more skeptical of most major news sources than Democrats. The one exception is Fox News, which twice as many Republicans believe all or most of (41%) than Democrats (21%).

The troubled economy and efforts to revamp the nation’s health care system dominated the public’s news interest in 2009. From the year’s start, Americans kept a close watch on the unfolding economic crisis, as well as Barack Obama’s efforts to grapple with the crisis while trying to make good on campaign promises.

For the third week of January, for example, 57% of Americans said they followed news about the condition of the U.S. economy very closely, the highest percentage following any story that closely all year. That same week, 52% said they followed news about Obama’s inauguration very closely. More than four-in-ten (42%) said the installation of the nation’s first African American president was the story they had followed most closely that week, according to the Pew Research Center’s weekly News Interest Index.

Those two topics – the economy and the new administration – then played a part in many of the top stories of 2009. In the second half of the year, the public’s focus shifted more to the debate over overhauling the nation’s health care system. Interest in health care reform grew in late summer – while Congress was in recess – as many lawmakers faced angry constituents at town hall meetings in their districts. Interest remained high as the debate unfolded in Washington.

Each week, the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism (PEJ) monitors the amount of coverage devoted to major stories by newspapers, television, radio and online news outlets. For 2009, there is a general correspondence between the stories that attracted the most interest on the NII and those that received the most coverage, according to PEJ’s News Coverage Index.

For the public, breaking stories grabbed attention as well, such as the dramatic landing of US Airways Flight 1549 in the Hudson River, the death of pop star Michael Jackson and the shootings last month at the Fort Hood army base. Americans also closely followed news about the spread of the swine flu and the flu vaccine. This proved to be one of several story lines this year for which public interest at times exceeded coverage, especially during the flu’s fall outbreak.

More Coverage than Interest

This year, the media’s top stories generally reflected the public’s top interests: the economic crisis, the new administration and the health care debate were the most covered news stories. But there were number of occasions when news coverage exceeded the public’s interest and vice versa.

For example, the public expressed modest interest in several heavily covered stories about events in Washington and politics. Stories about the death of Sen. Edward M. Kennedy accounted for more than a quarter (27%) of the newshole the week of Aug. 24, making it the most heavily reported story of the week. But that week, the health care debate dominated public interest, although it accounted for just 11% of the newshole: 30% said health care was the story they followed most closely that week, compared with 17% who said the same about news about Kennedy’s death.

Sonia Sotomayor’s historic nomination to the Supreme Court was another story that generated more coverage than interest. Stories about the first Latina nominated to the high court took up about a quarter (24%) of the newshole the week of May 25, making it the most reported story of that week. At that point, the story ranked third in public interest (15% most closely), behind the economy (20%) and news that GM planned to file for bankruptcy (18%).

In mid-July, stories about Sotomayor’s confirmation hearings made up 22% of coverage, again making it the top story of the week. But Americans were more focused on the economy (21%), health care reform (21%) and the aftermath of Michael Jackson’s death (17%); 14% said they followed the hearings more closely than any other story.

Sen. Arlen Specter’s switch to the Democratic Party and the release of Sarah Palin’s book, “Going Rogue,” also provide examples of coverage for national political stories that exceeded public interest. Specter’s switch, a critical story because it gave Democrats a more effective Senate majority, accounted for 9% of coverage the week of April 27; 3% of the public said this was the story they followed most closely.

Stories about Palin’s book took up 8% of the newshole the week of Nov. 16, while 2% said this was the story they followed most closely that week. Just 10% said they followed news about Palin’s book very closely.

More Interest than Coverage

The public took an early interest in the health care debate in March, when Obama talked about initial plans for overhauling the system, and remained highly interested until year’s end. About a quarter (26%) said health care was the story they followed most closely the week of March 2. News about health care, though, made up just 4% of the newshole. At that point, the economic crisis and stock market troubles dominated news coverage (43% of coverage).

Public interest and media coverage of the health care debate spiked in the summer, as lawmakers struggled to come to terms on legislation before their recess and then faced angry constituents during their break. Interest generally remained strong in the fall, even in weeks where there was little new on the story. In the Dec. 4-7 news interest survey, for example, 29% said they were following the health care debate more closely than any other story. That made health care the most closely followed story of that week. The coverage, as measured by PEJ, amounted to 5% of the newshole.

Early this year, the public showed strong interest in the stimulus legislation pushed by Obama to help jump start the troubled economy. In early February, the media and the public were largely in sync. By the week of Feb. 16, Congress had cleared a measure and Obama had signed it into law. That week, the media divided coverage among several major economic stories. Reports on the stimulus took up 9% of the newshole, compared to 28% the previous week. But the public remained keenly interested: 35% said this was the story they followed most closely. No other story that week came close.

The safe landing of US Airways Flight 1549 in the Hudson River attracted significant public interest in mid-January, a rare story of a plane crash with a happy ending. More than four-in-ten (44%) said they followed the story very closely, while 25% said it was the story they followed most closely that week. But the river landing and rescue occurred on a Thursday, well into PEJ’s weekly tally of news coverage, and accounted for only 12% of the total newshole measured for the week. The story did account for 29% of coverage for the remainder of the week, according to PEJ, putting coverage more in line with interest immediately after the incident.

In mid-April, the public also took a strong interest in news about the modern-day pirates who were capturing ships off the coast of Somalia and holding them hostage. With 34% saying they were following this story more closely than any other, the pirates topped the News Interest Index the week of April 13. The story did get significant media attention (16% of coverage), but the economy drew slightly more news coverage that week (18%).

Swine Flu Disparity in Fall

Americans followed news about the spread of the swine flu and the availability of a vaccine closely during both the spring and fall outbreaks. The initial reports on the flu outbreak, during the week of April 20, drew only 2% of all news coverage, according to PEJ. But it was the public’s top story that week, with 21% citing the swine flu as the story they followed most closely.

The next week, the media and public were more in sync: during the week of April 27, news about the swine flu was both the top story in terms of news coverage (31% of the newshole) and news interest (39% most closely). Public interest in news about the swine flu remained high in May, though the amount of coverage leveled off.

The weekly News Interest Index also found that for many Americans the swine flu was a local news story. The May 6 News Interest survey asked people where they turned for news on the flu: 69% said they had learned something about the flu from local television, while 63% said cable TV news. Notably, the internet was viewed as most useful in learning about the swine flu; 25% named the internet compared with 19% who said cable news and 17% local news.

The disparity in news coverage versus interest proved larger in the fall with the second outbreak. This time, public interest ramped up quickly with swine flu among the top one or two most closely followed stories throughout most of October. But national media coverage proved less intense. The week of Oct. 19, for example, 32% of the public said they were following swine flu developments more closely than any other story, making it the most closely followed story of the week. News coverage of the swine flu accounted for just 5% of the newshole, according to PEJ.

Matches and Mismatches at a Glance

The graphic below plots out the interest and coverage levels for all of the top weekly stories of the year. For long-running stories, such as the economy or health care, the numbers have been averaged and are represented by larger square dots. The bold diagonal line represents the typical relationship between coverage and interest across the entire year’s worth of weekly measurements (as defined by a simple regression analysis).

Data points above the diagonal line represent stories in which public interest was high relative to the amount of press coverage. Those points below the line show stories in which press coverage was high relative to the amount of public interest. In both directions, the farther a story is from the line, the greater the gap between interest and coverage.

2009 in Review

A look at the two most closely followed stories each week shows how the economy and the health care debate consistently dominated the public’s news interests. Interest in the economy and related stories, including the economic stimulus bill and unemployment, peaked early in the year. The economy continued to be the public’s second most closely followed story throughout much of the second half of the year.

The debate over reforming the nation’s health care system heated up in late July and was the public’s most closely followed story nearly every week for the remainder of the year.

In addition to the economy and health care reform, other stories broke through and captured the public’s attention at different points throughout the year. In mid-January, the safe landing of the US Airways jet in the Hudson River was the most closely followed story by the public. A week later, Barack Obama’s inauguration was the most closely followed story.

In mid-April, stories about pirates attacking ships off the coast of Somalia captured the public’s interest. And the death of Michael Jackson and the ensuing investigation made this the top story for three weeks from the end of June through mid-July.

The public closely tracked the outbreak of swine flu during the first wave in late April and May and then again during the second outbreak this fall. The story was either the top or second most closely followed story for four straight weeks in October. In November, the shootings at Fort Hood captured the public’s attention and was one of the most closely followed stories for two consecutive weeks.

Interest in news about the war in Afghanistan grew late in the year as the Obama administration deliberated over a new strategy. The public’s attention peaked in early December shortly after Obama announced the troop increase. This was the only week this year that Afghanistan was one of the top two most closely followed stories.

Tracking Major Stories over Time

The graphs below track interest and coverage over the “life span” of several of the year’s major stories: the economic stimulus bill, and the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court and Michael Jackson’s death. The next set of graphs compares interest and coverage for news about the economy, the debate over health care reform, the situation in Afghanistan and the swine flu when they were asked over the course of the year.

About the News Interest Index

The News Interest Index is a weekly survey conducted by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press aimed at gauging the public’s interest in and reaction to major news events.

This project has been undertaken in conjunction with the Project for Excellence in Journalism’s News Coverage Index, an ongoing content analysis of the news. The News Coverage Index catalogues the news from top news organizations across five major sectors of the media: newspapers, network television, cable television, radio and the internet. Each week (from Monday through Sunday) PEJ compiles this data to identify the top stories for the week. The News Interest Index survey collects data from Friday through Monday to gauge public interest in the most covered stories of the week.

Results for the weekly surveys are based on landline telephone interviews among a nationwide sample of approximately 1,000 adults, 18 years of age or older, conducted under the direction of ORC (Opinion Research Corporation). For results based on the total sample, one can say with 95% confidence that the error attributable to sampling is plus or minus 4 percentage points.

In addition to sampling error, one should bear in mind that question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of opinion polls, and that results based on subgroups will have larger margins of error.

For more information about the Project for Excellence in Journalism’s News Coverage Index, go to www.journalism.org.

The Fox News Channel is viewed by Americans in more ideological terms than other television news networks. And while the public is evenly divided in its view of hosts of cable news programs having strong political opinions, more Fox News viewers see this as a good thing than as a bad thing.

Nearly half of Americans (47%) say they think of Fox News as “mostly conservative,” 14% say it is “mostly liberal,” and 24% say it is “neither in particular.” Opinion about the ideological orientation of other TV news outlets is more mixed: while many view CNN and the three broadcast networks as mostly liberal, about the same percentages say they are neither in particular. However, somewhat more say MSNBC is mostly liberal than say it is neither in particular, by 36% to 27%.

The perceptions of those who regularly tune into these news networks are similar to those of the public. Nearly half (48%) of regular Fox viewers say the network is mostly conservative. About four-in-ten (41%) regular viewers of CNN describe the network as mostly liberal and 36% of regular MSNBC viewers say the same about that network.

The latest weekly News Interest Index survey, conducted October 23-26 among 1,001 adults by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, also shows that Americans followed news about the spread of the swine flu and the availability of a vaccine more closely than any other major news story last week. And the percentage of Americans saying they followed swine flu news very closely (43%) now matches the highest levels of interest reached during the previous flu outbreak in May.

The survey also finds the public is evenly split in its view of cable news hosts “having strong opinions about politics.” About four-in-ten (42%) see this as a good thing while an identical percentage sees it as a bad thing. By 51% to 36%, regular Fox News viewers view cable hosts with strong political opinions as a good thing; regular viewers of other TV news outlets are more evenly divided over opinionated cable news hosts.

More Fox Viewers See Other Networks as Liberal

The perception of Fox News as mostly conservative is shared equally by regular Fox News viewers and regular viewers of other TV news networks. Half of regular CNN viewers see the Fox News Channel as mostly conservative, as do 48% its own viewers, 48% of regular MSNBC viewers and 45% of the regular viewers of national nightly network news on ABC, NBC and CBS.

By contrast, regular Fox News viewers are more likely than those who tune into other news networks to see those networks as mostly liberal. For instance, 50% of regular Fox News viewers say NBC News is mostly liberal, compared with only about third of regular viewers of CNN (35%), MSNBC (31%) and the nightly network news (34%). There are comparable differences between how Fox News viewers and other news audiences see the ideologies of CBS News and ABC News.

Nearly half of Fox News viewers also say that CNN (49%) and MSNBC (47%) are mostly liberal. However, nearly as many CNN viewers (41%) say that network is mostly liberal; similarly, 43% of regular MSNBC viewers say that network is mostly liberal.

Views of the networks’ ideologies also differ greatly by personal ideology. More than half of liberals (57%) say Fox News is mostly conservative, compared with 46% of moderates and 44% of conservatives.

By contrast, 48% of conservatives say that MSNBC is mostly liberal, compared with 31% of moderates and 29% of liberals. These are similar to views of CNN: 51% of conservatives say the network is mostly liberal, while 33% of moderates and 28% of liberals agree. There are comparable ideological differences in perceptions of the ideologies of NBC News, ABC News and CBS News.

Divided Over Opinionated Cable Hosts

The public is split over whether it is a good thing or bad thing for hosts of cable news shows to have strong opinions about politics; 42% see this as a good thing while as many see it as a bad thing. In July 2003, 47% said it was a good thing for hosts to have strong political opinions, while 40% saw it as a bad thing.

Just over half of regular Fox News viewers (51%) say it is a good thing, while 36% say it is a bad thing. Opinions are more evenly divided among regular viewers of the other cable news channels and network news, as well as regular newspaper readers and online news users.

Views of Obama Coverage

There has been a steady decline since early this year in the proportion saying the press has been fair in the way it has covered Barack Obama. Currently, 37% see coverage of Obama as fair, down from 43% in August and 64% in January, shortly after Obama’s inauguration.

Over the same period, increasing percentages say Obama coverage is not critical enough and too critical. Currently, 31% say Obama coverage is not critical enough (up from 18% in late January) and 26% say it is too critical (12% in late January).

Fully 60% of Republicans say the press is not critical enough of Obama, while nearly as many Democrats see coverage of Obama as too critical (41%) as fair (44%). Among political independents, about as many say the coverage has been fair (38%) as not critical enough (35%).

Among regular viewers of Fox News, 45% say the press has not been critical enough of Obama, compared with 15% of regular MSNBC viewers, 23% of regular CNN viewers and 21% of regular nightly network news viewers.

Most Continue to Expect Health Care Bill to Pass

More than half (53%) of Americans say they think a health care reform bill will pass over the next year, while 40% say they do not think that will happen. That is little changed from last week, when 57% said they thought health care legislation would pass, while 38% said they did not. In a survey conducted Oct. 9-12, 45% said they thought a bill would pass over the next year; 46% thought it would not.

Meanwhile, 66% say they have seen or heard advertisements about the health care debate, which is about the same as in early September (63%). While 23% say they have heard a mostly negative message about health care reform, comparable percentages volunteer that they have heard a mix of positive and negative messages (23%) while 18% say they have heard mostly positive messages about health care reform. These assessments also have changed only modestly since early September.

Off-Course Flight Registers Widely

About three-quarters of the public heard either a lot (44%) or a little (30%) about a Northwest Airlines flight that flew 150 miles past its destination last week before turning around.

By comparison, 30% say they heard a lot and 24% say they heard a little about Obama administration officials saying that the Fox News Channel is not really a news organization. Nearly half (46%) say they heard nothing at all about the dispute, even though coverage of this issue that accounted for 5% of the newshole, according to an analysis by the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism (PEJ).

However, 46% of regular Fox News viewers heard a lot about the Obama administration’s criticisms of Fox News. That compares with smaller proportions of regular MSNBC viewers (34%), CNN viewers (32%) and network news viewers (26%).

Just 19% of the public heard a lot about the Justice Department announcing it will not pursue cases against people who use medical marijuana if state laws allow it, while 46% heard a little about this. Slightly more than a third (36%) say they heard nothing about this story.

The Week’s Other News

For the first time this fall, news about swine flu and the vaccine ranked atop the public’s news agenda. About a third (32%) followed news about the swine flu more closely than any other story. More than four-in-ten (43%) say they paid very close attention to the story, matching a high reached in early May 2009. For the week, interest was strong despite modest media coverage; swine flu filled 5% of the newshole and trailed coverage of other leading stories, including the economy, Afghanistan, and the debate over health care reform.

Second to the news about swine flu, the health care reform debate was the top story for 27% of the public; 40% followed news about the debate very closely. Coverage accounted for 10% of the national newshole.

Reports about the condition of the U.S. economy was the top story for 15% of the public, while 44% say they followed economic news very closely. News about the economy made up 10% of the newshole. Another 6% of coverage was devoted to issues surrounding executive pay and attempts to regulate it. Almost one third of Americans (32%) say they followed this story very closely; it was the top story for 4%.

News about the U.S. military effort in Afghanistan was the most closely followed story of the week for 9% of the public. Close to a third (32%) say they followed Afghanistan news very closely – one of the few times this year that very close interest has topped 30%. The media devoted 13% of coverage to Afghanistan, according to PEJ.

Fewer tuned into news about political instability in Pakistan. Just 1% named this their top story, while 17% say they followed news about Pakistan very closely. Coverage made up 2% of the newshole.

These findings are based on the most recent installment of the weekly News Interest Index, an ongoing project of the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press. The index, building on the Center’s longstanding research into public attentiveness to major news stories, examines news interest as it relates to the news media’s coverage. The weekly survey is conducted in conjunction with The Project for Excellence in Journalism’s News Coverage Index, which monitors the news reported by major newspaper, television, radio and online news outlets on an ongoing basis. In the most recent week, data relating to news coverage were collected from October 19-12, 2009 and survey data measuring public interest in the top news stories of the week were collected October 23-26, 2009 from a nationally representative sample of 1,001 adults.

About the News Interest Index

The News Interest Index is a weekly survey conducted by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press aimed at gauging the public’s interest in and reaction to major news events.

This project has been undertaken in conjunction with the Project for Excellence in Journalism’s News Coverage Index, an ongoing content analysis of the news. The News Coverage Index catalogues the news from top news organizations across five major sectors of the media: newspapers, network television, cable television, radio and the internet. Each week (from Monday through Sunday) PEJ compiles this data to identify the top stories for the week. The News Interest Index survey collects data from Friday through Monday to gauge public interest in the most covered stories of the week.

Results for the weekly surveys are based on landline telephone interviews among a nationwide sample of approximately 1,000 adults, 18 years of age or older, conducted under the direction of ORC (Opinion Research Corporation). For results based on the total sample, one can say with 95% confidence that the error attributable to sampling is plus or minus 3.5 percentage points.

In addition to sampling error, one should bear in mind that question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of opinion polls, and that results based on subgroups will have larger margins of error.

For more information about the Project for Excellence in Journalism’s News Coverage Index, go to www.journalism.org.

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.

The partisan gaps in several of these opinions, which had widened considerably over the past decade, have narrowed. There are some notable exceptions to these trends, however, as Republicans increasingly see news organizations as influenced by powerful people and organizations and not professional, while Democrats’ views have changed little.

The Pew Research Center for the People & the Press’ biennial media attitudes survey, conducted July 22-26 among 1,506 adults reached on landlines and cell phones, finds that even as the party gaps in several criticisms of the press have lessened over the past few years, views of many individual media sources are deeply divided along party lines.

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 poll finds that television remains the dominant news source for the public, with 71% saying they get most of their national and international news from television. More than four-in-ten (42%) say they get most of their news on these subjects from the internet, compared with 33% who cite newspapers. Last December, for the first time in a Pew Research Center survey, more people said they got most of their national and international news from the internet than said newspapers were their main source.

However, online news lags behind newspapers as a source for news about local issues. As with national and international news, most people (64%) cite television as their main source for local news. Yet despite declines in newspaper readership over the last several years, about four-in-ten people (41%) turn to newspapers for news about issues and events in their local area, more than twice the number that turn to the internet for local news (17%).

The public’s impressions of which news organizations do the most to uncover local news stories largely mirror the top sources for local news. More than four-in-ten (44%) say that local television stations do the most to uncover and report on important local issues, while a quarter (25%) identify local newspapers as the primary sources of local news reporting. Far fewer people identify local independent online organizations (11%) or radio stations (10%) as responsible for uncovering most local news stories. Even among those who get most of their local news from newspapers, about as many say most original local reporting is done by television stations (41%) as by newspapers (38%).

Long-Term Views of Press Performance

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.

Opinions about the accuracy of news stories fluctuated over the next decade, but by the late 1990s majorities said that news stories are often inaccurate. That has been the case for the past decade as well, with the exception of a brief period in fall 2001, when coverage of 9/11 and terrorism boosted the press’s positive ratings. In the current survey, 63% say news stories are often inaccurate.

Similarly, the proportion saying news organizations “try to cover up their mistakes” has reached a high of 70%, up from 63% two years ago. In 1985, a smaller majority (55%) said news organizations tried to cover up their mistakes. And while most Americans (59%) see news organizations as “highly professional,” the proportion expressing this view also has slipped since 2007 (66%). In 1985, 72% said news organizations were highly professional.

The pattern is the sa
me regarding public attitudes about whether the press is biased, deals with all sides fairly, and is independent.

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.

Partisan Press Evaluations

In 1985, there were at most modest differences between Republicans and Democrats in views of press bias, fairness, the accuracy of news stories and whether powerful people and institutions exert too much influence over news organizations.

By the late 1990s, more Republicans than Democrats said the press was politically biased and tended to favor one side in dealing with political and social issues. Yet on basic issues relating to press professionalism and the accuracy of news stories, there continued to be no significant partisan differences.

During George W. Bush’s presidency, the partisan gap over most views of press performance increased markedly. In 2005, the proportion of Republicans saying news stories are often inaccurate reached a high of 68%: just 47% of Democrats agreed. Roughly a third of Republicans (34%) said news organizations were “not professional,” compared with 20% of Democrats.

But the most striking change during the Bush years came in opinions about whether news organizations “stand up for America” or are “too critical of America.” The proportion of Republicans saying the press is too critical of America jumped from 47% in 2003 to 67% in 2005; at the same time, the partisan gap in views on this issue nearly tripled – from 15 points to 43 points.

In the current survey, opinions about whether the press is too critical of America – as well as whether its stories are inaccurate and whether it tends to favor one side on political issues – have become less partisan as Democratic criticisms of news organizations have increased.

At the same time, however, the partisan gap has widened since 2007 in opinions about whether news organizations are not professional (from eight to 21 points) and are often influenced by powerful people and organizations (from 10 points to 17 points). In both cases, Republicans express more negative views of news organizations than at any point in the 24-year history of the survey; 39% say news organizations are not professional while 83% say they are often influenced by the powerful.

Fox Viewers More Critical

Attitudes about the press also differ by where people get their news. The Fox News audience, which includes a larger share of Republicans than do the audiences for other news outlets, is far more critical of the press’s performance.

Where Fox News viewers particularly stand out is in their low regard for the patriotism and morals of news organizations. Nearly six-in-ten (59%) of those who say they get most national and international news from Fox News say news organizations are too critical of America. By contrast, smaller percentages of those who rely on the internet (44%), newspapers (41%), CNN (39%) or the broadcast networks (36%) express this view. In addition, Fox News viewers are the only audience in which a majority (51%) says news organizations are immoral rather than moral.

Yet those who go online for national and international news also give the press relatively low ratings. Notably, 80% of the online news audience says that news stories are often inaccurate, which is only slightly less than the percentage of Fox News viewers (86%) and greater than the proportions of other news audiences expressing this view. In addition, 39% of those who say their main source of news is the internet say news organizations are declining in influence; that compares with roughly a third of Fox News and CNN viewers and smaller proportions of those who rely on network news and newspapers.

Views of Obama Coverage

About six-in-ten Americans (62%) say that news organizations are being fair to the Obama administration, while 23% say media coverage has been unfair. Nearly three-quarters of Republicans (73%) say coverage of the administration has been fair, compared with 54% of Democrats and 67% of independents.

Historically, members of the party controlling the White House have been less likely to see coverage of the administration as fair. In November 2005, for example, 50% of the public said that coverage of George W. Bush’s administration was fair. While about two-thirds of Democrats (68%) viewed the coverage as fair, just a quarter of Republicans (25%) agreed.

In February 1998, shortly after the initial allegations that President Clinton had had a sexual relationship with a White House intern, the public was divided in its views of coverage of Bill Clinton’s administration; 49% said it was fair, while 44% said it was unfair. Only about a third of Democrats (34%) thought coverage of the administration had been fair, compared with 66% of Republicans and 54% of independents.

At this point, public perceptions of coverage of the new Obama administration are similar to views in August of Bill Clinton’s first term. At that time, 66% said coverage of the new administration had been fair, while 21% said they saw it as unfair. Among partisans, 77% of Republicans said coverage was fair, compared with 61% of Democrats and 66% of independents.

But the public does see the media growing increasingly critical of the Obama administration, according to a separate measure in the Pew Research Center’s News Interest Index survey. In mid-August, a plurality of Americans (43%) said press coverage of Obama had been fair, but that figure had declined by 10 points since early June, and was down from 64% in January as Obama took office. The proportion saying that coverage of Obama had become too critical increased since early June – from 16% to 23%; the proportion of Democrats who said coverage of Obama was too critical nearly doubled during this period (from 22% in June to 40% in August). There was virtually no change in the percentage who said coverage of Obama had not been critical enough.

Most Support Watchdog Press

There is a similar pattern of partisanship in opinions about whether criticism of political leaders by news organizations keeps leaders from doing things that should not be done, or whether it keeps leaders from doing their job. For more than two decades, majorities have expressed the view that a critical press keeps leaders from doing things that should not be done – but the views of Republicans and Democrats shift depending on which party controls the White House.

Currently, 62% say that criticism of political leaders is worthwhile because it keeps those leaders from doing things that should not be done, while 22% say such criticism keeps leaders from doing their jobs. Two years ago, 58% said that press criticism did more good than harm.

In the new survey, 65% of Republicans believe that criticism does more good than harm, compared with 55% of Democrats and 66% of independents. That stands in stark contrast to the way that Republicans viewed the press’s watchdog role when George W. Bush was in the White House. Two years ago, for example, just 44% of Republicans said that press criticism of political leaders did more good than harm; that compared with 60% of independents and 71% of Democrats.

The same pattern has played out since Ronald Reagan’s presidency. At that point – and during the presidency of George H.W. Bush – Democrats were more supportive than Republicans of the role of a watchdog press. But when Bill Clinton came into office, partisan opinions shifted. The balance shifted back again after George W. Bush took office and have now returned to a balance similar to that seen during the Clinton presidency.

Favorability of Traditional News Sources

While the public has become much more critical of the way news organizations do their jobs, most Americans continue to give favorable ratings to traditional news sources – local TV news, daily newspapers and network television news.

Favorable opinions of all three have declined since 1985; nonetheless, majorities continue to express favorable opinions of local TV news (73%), the daily newspaper they are most familiar with (65%), and network TV news (64%).

Views of local TV news continue to be less partisan than opinions of other leading news sources. As was the case in 1985, there is very little difference between the views of Republicans (79% favorable) and Democrats (77%); somewhat fewer independents (67%) rate local TV news favorably.

Currently, 65% say they have a favorable impression of the daily newspaper they are most familiar with. Positive opinions of daily papers have decreased by 16 points since 1985, with nearly all the decline (14 points) coming in the past decade. However, unfavorable opinions of newspapers have risen only slightly since 1999 – from 17% to 20%. Since then, the proportion saying they are unable to rate daily newspapers has increased from 4% to 15%.

Over the past two decades, partisanship has become a much greater factor in favorable ratings of network TV news than for local TV news or daily newspapers. In 1985, 87% of Democrats, 85% of Republicans and 81% of independents said they had a favorable impression of network TV news. Since then, favorable opinions among Republicans have fallen by 30 points (to 55%); the decline has been nearly as large among independents (27 points). But nearly as many Democrats currently express positive views of network TV news (81%) as did so in 1985 (87%).

Main Sources of National, Local News

The vast majority of Americans (71%) continue to cite television as their source for most national and international news. This is little changed from recent years; in December 2008, 70% said they got most news from television.

More than four-in-ten (42%) say they get most national and international news from the internet, which also is about the same as in December 2008 (40%) but much higher than in September 2007 (24%). As was the case last December, somewhat fewer (33%) get most of their news from newspapers than from the internet.

When it comes to local news, television also is where most of the public turns: 64% say they get most of their news about issues and events in their area from television, compared with 41% who say they get most local news from newspapers. And while 42% of Americans rely on the internet for national and international news, fewer than half as many (17%) say the internet is their main source of local news. Americans are about equally likely to say radio is their main source for national and international news (21%) and local news (18%).

While 70% of those younger than 30 say they get most of their national and international news from television, nearly as many (64%) point to the internet. Among those ages 30 to 49 a similar pattern is evident; 62% get most national and international news from television, while 54% cite the internet.

For Americans 50 and older, television is the dominant news source. Yet after television, the internet rivals newspapers for those ages 50 to 64 (37% newspapers vs. 29% internet). Those 65 and older are the only age group in which substantially more people cite newspapers (55%) than the internet (10%).

Television is the main local news source for all age groups; but in contrast to national and international news, newspapers are mentioned more frequently than the internet. Even among those younger than 30, substantially more say they get most local news from newspapers (39%) than from the internet (21%). In addition for all age groups except those 65 and older, roughly equal proportions cite radio and the internet as a main source for local news.

Partisanship and Cable Sources

Four-in-ten (40%) Americans cite a major cable news outlet (CNN, Fox News and MSNBC) as their main source for news about national and international affairs. As in the past, comparable percentages say they rely on CNN (22%) and Fox News (19%) while fewer (6%) say they get most of their news from MSNBC.

There has been a gradual widening in the partisan differences in the viewership of both Fox News and CNN in recent years. More than three times as many Republicans (34%) as Democrats (10%) say they get most of their national and international news from Fox. By comparison, Democrats are more than twice as likely than Republicans to cite CNN (29% vs. 13%). A similar pattern is evident for MSNBC, with more Democrats (9%) than Republicans (3%) citing it as a main news source.

Shutdown of News Outlets Seen as Important Loss

Though the public is increasingly critical of news media organizations, most people think it would be an important loss if major news sources shut down.

More than eight-in-ten Americans (82%) say that if all local television news programs went off the air – and shut down their web sites– it would be an important loss. About three-quarters say the same about the network evening news (on ABC, CBS, NBC and PBS), cable news networks (like CNN, Fox News and MSNBC) and local newspapers in their area. Somewhat fewer people (68%) say that it would be a major loss if large national newspapers (like USA Today, The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal) were to stop publishing and go offline.

Although fewer young people cite television and newspapers as their main news source than do those 60 and older, young people are actually more likely to say it would be an important loss if national news sources such as network TV evening news (83% 18-29 year olds vs. 74% 60 and older), cable news (82
% vs. 70%) and large national newspapers (78% vs. 60%) shut down. And while more Republicans than Democrats express critical views of the performance of news organizations, Republicans are about as likely as Democrats to say the loss of major news outlets would be important. The only exception is network evening news; even in this case, 69% of Republicans say the shutdown of network evening news would be an important loss, compared with 85% of Democrats.

For more than a decade, the audiences for most traditional news sources have steadily declined, as the number of people getting news online has surged. However, today it is not a choice between traditional sources and the internet for the core elements of today’s news audiences.

A sizable minority of Americans find themselves at the intersection of these two long-standing trends in news consumption. Integrators, who get the news from both traditional sources and the internet, are a more engaged, sophisticated and demographically sought-after audience segment than those who mostly rely on traditional news sources. Integrators share some characteristics with a smaller, younger, more internet savvy audience segment – Net-Newsers – who principally turn to the web for news, and largely eschew traditional sources. (For a complete description of how the news audience segments are classified, see pg. 45.)

Like web-oriented news consumers, Integrators are affluent and highly educated. However, they are older, on average, than those who consider the internet their main source of news. Overall, Integrators spend more time with the news on a typical day than do those who rely more on either traditional or internet sources; far more enjoy keeping up with the news a lot than in any other news segment.

Integrators also are heavier consumers of national news – especially news about politics and Washington – and are avid sports news consumers. Television is their main news source, but more than a third cite the internet as their primary source of news during the day. This reflects the fact that a relatively large proportion of Integrators log on to the internet from work (45%).

The 2008 biennial news consumption survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press was conducted by telephone – including both landline phones and cell phones – from April 30 to June 1 among 3,612 adults nationwide. It finds four distinct segments in today’s news audience: Integrators, who comprise 23% of the public; the less populous Net-Newsers (13%); Traditionalists – the oldest (median age: 52) and largest news segment (46% of the public); and the Disengaged (14%) who stand out for their low levels of interest in the news and news consumption.

Net-Newsers are the youngest of the news user segments (median age: 35). They are affluent and even better educated than the News Integrators: More than eight-in-ten have at least attended college. Net-Newsers not only rely primarily on the internet for news, they are leading the way in using new web features and other technologies. Nearly twice as many regularly watch news clips on the internet as regularly watch nightly network news broadcasts (30% vs. 18%).

This web-oriented news segment, perhaps more than the others, underscores the challenges facing traditional news outlets. Fewer than half (47%) watch television news on a typical day. Twice as many read an online newspaper than a printed newspaper on a typical day (17% vs. 8%), while 10% read both.

However, Net-Newsers do rely on some well known traditional media outlets. They are at least as likely as Integrators and Traditionalists to read magazines such as The New Yorker and The Atlantic, and somewhat more likely to get news from the BBC.

Fully 82% of Net-Newsers get news during the course of the day, far more than the Traditionalists and the Disengaged, and slightly more than the Integrators. Nearly all who get news at this time go online for information (92%). Yet they do tap traditional sources at other times of the day; nearly two-thirds get news late in the evening and of these, more rely on television news than the internet.

Despite sweeping changes in the news landscape, Traditionalists remain the largest segment of the overall news audience. Compared with the Integrators and Net-Newsers, Traditionalists are downscale economically – 43% are not employed and 60% have no more than a high school education.

Television dominates as the favored news source among Traditionalists. And at each time of the day – whether morning, daytime, dinner hour, or late at night – overwhelming majorities who get news at these times cite television as their main source. Unlike the news Integrators, or those who mostly get news from the web, most Traditionalists say that seeing pictures and video, rather than reading or hearing the facts, gives them the best understanding of events.

Most Americans fall into the three core news audiences – Integrators, Traditionalists, or Net-Newsers. The fourth group – the Disengaged – are very much bystanders when it comes to news consumption. They are less educated on average than even the Traditionalists and exhibit extremely low interest in – and knowledge of – current events. Just 55% of the Disengaged get any news on a typical day, and just 20% know that the Democrats have a majority in the House of Representatives.

Trends in News Consumption

The diversity of news audience segments identified reflects the long-term changes in news consumption observed in the biennial survey, conducted April 30-June 1 among 3,615 Americans.

Since the early 1990s, the proportion of Americans saying they read a newspaper on a typical day has declined by about 40%; the proportion that regularly watches nightly network news has fallen by half.

These trends have been more stable in recent years, but the percentage saying they read a newspaper yesterday has fallen from 40% to 34% in the last two years alone. Newspapers would have suffered even greater losses without their online versions. Most of the loss in readership since 2006 has come among those who read the print newspaper; just 27% say they read only the print version of a daily newspaper yesterday, down from 34% in 2006.

The television news audience, by contrast, has generally remained stable since 2006, and the proportion regularly watching cable news in particular has increased (from 34% to 39%). The appeal of television news is seen in the large percentages of the news segments – particularly Integrators – that continue to watch: A majority of Integrators (56%) get news online on a typical day while an even larger share (66%) got news from television.

Cable news draws substantial numbers of viewers among Integrators and Net- Newsers. More than four-in-ten Net-Newsers (43%) regularly watch cable news, far more than the proportion that regularly watches network or local news. A majority of Integrators also regularly tunes in to cable news (53%); by comparison, just 37% say they regularly watch one of the nightly network news broadcasts.

Notably, radio news also is an important element in Integrators’ news diet. Nearly half of Integrators (46%) listen to news on the radio during a typical day. While the internet is the main news source for Integrators during the course of the day, about as many in this segment rely on radio news as TV news during the day (32% radio vs. 36% TV news).

Online News Still Growing

Since 2006, the proportion of Americans who say they get news online at least three days a week has increased from 31% to 37%. About as many people now say they go online for news regularly (at least three days a week) as say they regularly watch cable news (39%); substantially more people regularly get news online than regularly watch one of the nightly network news broadcasts (37% vs. 29%).

Since 2006, daily online news use has increased by about a third, from 18% to 25%. However, as the online news audience grows, the educational divide in online news use – evident since the internet’s early days in the mid-1990s – also is increasing. Currently, 44% of college graduates say they get news online every day, compared with just 11% of those with a high school education or less.

Net-Newsers and Integrators take advantage of a range of web features to get the news. Roughly four-in-ten (39%) Net-Newsers – and about a third of Integrators (32%) – have gotten a news story emailed to them in the past week. And while 30% of Net-Newsers regularly watch news online, 19% regularly listen to news on the web.

Net-Newsers and Integrators also rely on news and political blogs as a part of their news diet. Roughly a quarter of Net-Newsers (26%) and somewhat fewer Integrators (19%) say they regularly read blogs on politics or current events. Overall, only 10% of the public regularly reads political and news blogs.

Other Key Findings:

• In spite of the increasing variety of ways to get the news, the proportion of young people getting no news on a typical day has increased substantially over the past decade. About a third of those younger than 25 (34%) say they get no news on a typical day, up from 25% in 1998.
• A slim majority of Americans (51%) now say they check in on the news from time to time during the day, rather than get the news at regular times. This marks the first time since the question was first asked in 2002 that most Americans consider themselves “news grazers.”
• Social networking sites are very popular with young people, but they have not become a major source of news. Just 10% of those with social networking profiles say they regularly get news from these sites.
• As in past news consumption surveys, the audiences for specific cable news outlets remain divided along political lines. Currently 51% of regular CNN viewers are Democrats, up from 45% two years ago. Nearly four-in-ten regular Fox News viewers are Republicans (39%), about the same as in 2006.
• Regular readers of magazines such as The New Yorker, The Atlantic and Harper’s Magazine stand out for their high level of political knowledge. Nearly half (47%) answered three political knowledge questions correctly – the highest percentage of any news audience.
• Overall, 15% of Americans say they have a smart phone, such as an iPhone or a Blackberry. More than a third of smart phone owners (37%) say they get news from these devices.
• Believability ratings for national news organizations remain very low. If anything, believability ratings for major online news outlets – including news aggregators such as Google News and AOL News – are lower than for major print, cable and broadcast outlets.
• Though the audience for nightly network news broadcasts are smaller than they were a decade ago, regular viewers of these broadcasts are loyal. Nearly seven-in-ten (69%) say they would miss these broadcasts a lot if they were no longer available.

Barack Obama may be building an insurmountable lead in the Democratic primary race, but the public is sending a strong message to journalists and pundits: It is too early to declare, as some already have, that the race is over.

Fully 72% of the public – including comparable percentages of Democrats, Republicans and independents – say that journalists should not be anointing Obama as the Democratic nominee at this stage in the race. Just 20% say that journalists should be doing this.

Opinion among Democrats about what the press should do in this regard may well reflect their view that Hillary Clinton should stay in the race. Recent surveys by Gallup and ABC News/Washington Post find that most Democrats believe that Clinton should stay in the race. In the ABC News/Washington Post survey, released May 12, 64% of Democrats, including 42% of Obama supporters, said Clinton should remain in the race.

The presidential campaign once again dominated the national news last week, with 46% of the newshole devoted to the race. According to the Project for Excellence in Journalism’s Campaign Coverage Index, this represented the biggest single week of election coverage since the week of the Texas and Ohio primaries in early March.

Public interest in the campaign was up moderately: 35% followed campaign news very closely up from 27% the week before. Clinton generated her highest level of campaign coverage for the year thus far (70% of all campaign stories featured Clinton), edging out Obama (at 67%), according to PEJ. However, Obama remained the most visible candidate in the eyes of the public.

Since mid-March, the amount of news coverage devoted to Clinton compared to Obama has fluctuated in concert with events on the campaign trail. However Obama has consistently been the more visible candidate to the public. On average, more than half of the public has pointed to Obama as the candidate they have heard the most about in the news recently. About 30%, on average, have named Clinton. Consistently, fewer than 10% have named John McCain as the most visible candidate in the news during this period.

Most Aware of Primary Endgame Debate

After what was clearly not a good week for the Clinton campaign, both in terms of press coverage and primary results, overall opinions of Clinton grew somewhat less favorable. While 61% of the public said their views of Clinton had not changed in recent days, 25% said their opinion of the former first lady had become less favorable and only 12% said their opinion had become more favorable. There was no net change for Obama: 55% said their views of the Illinois senator had not changed in recent days, 20% said their opinion had become more favorable and 23% said it was less favorable. As in previous weeks, opinions of McCain remain largely unchanged.

An overwhelming percentage of Americans have heard at least a little about the debate over whether Hillary Clinton should end her campaign now, or stay in the race until the primaries are completed. More than half (52%) have heard a lot about this and 33% have heard a little. Only 15% have heard nothing at all.

By contrast, the public is far less aware of recent efforts by talk show host Rush Limbaugh to prolong the Democratic nomination race by encouraging his listeners to vote for Clinton over Obama in the primaries. Just 14% of the public, including 18% of Republicans, heard a lot about what Limbaugh called “Operation Chaos;” another 28% of the public heard a little about this. More than half of the public (58%) said they heard nothing about this.

These findings are based on the most recent installment of the weekly News Interest Index, an ongoing project of the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press. The index, building on the Center’s longstanding research into public attentiveness to major news stories, examines news interest as it relates to the news media’s agenda. The weekly survey is conducted in conjunction with The Project for Excellence in Journalism’s News Coverage Index, which monitors the news reported by major newspaper, television, radio and online news outlets on an ongoing basis. In the most recent week, data relating to news coverage was collected from May 5-11 and survey data measuring public interest in the top news stories of the week was collected May 9-12 from a nationally representative sample of 1,001 adults.

Continuing Interest in Economy

In other news last week, the public continued to pay close attention to reports about the U.S. economy. Fully 45% followed news about the economy very closely and 25% listed this as the single news story they followed more closely than any other. The national media devoted 5% of its overall coverage to the economy.

The cyclone that struck Burma resulting in devastating loss of life and property was the second most heavily covered news story of the week. The media devoted 15% of its coverage to this story.

Public interest in this story was modest, especially when compared with the 2004 earthquake and tsunami in the Indian Ocean. About a quarter of the public (23%) tracked news about the cyclone very closely, with 15% saying it was their top story of the week. In January 2005, 58% of the public said they followed the tsunami’s aftermath very closely.

Despite very little news coverage of the situation in Iraq, 29% of the public continued to follow the war very closely. Public interest in news about the war has remained fairly stable over the past year, even as coverage has fluctuated significantly.

News about Jenna Bush’s recent wedding in Crawford, Texas was closely guarded by the White House. With little press coverage of the May 10 wedding, just 4% say they followed the event very closely, and another 7% followed it fairly closely. Republicans expressed more interest in the nuptials than did Democrats or independents; 21% of Republicans say they followed the wedding very or fairly closely, compared with 8% of Democrats and 9% of independents.

Who’s Watching American Idol?

As the seventh season of American Idol wraps up, 19% of the public is paying close attention to the show – 12% are following Idol very closely and 7% are following fairly closely. The percentage closely following Idol is down slightly from 22% at this point in the season last year.

Last year women were more likely than men to be paying close attention to American Idol. This year that gap has narrowed – 21% of women and 17% of men are following the show very or fairly closely. The falloff in female viewers has been exclusively among those under age 50.

Only 17% of those under age 30 say they’re following Idol very or fairly closely, down somewhat from 26% last year. The show, which is popular with children as well as adults, continues to draw in more parents than non-parents. Nearly a quarter of those with children under age 18 living in their household are closely following Idol (23%), compared with 16% of non-parents.

About the News Interest Index

The News Interest Index is a weekly survey conducted by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press aimed at gauging the public’s interest in and reaction to major news events.

This project has been undertaken in conjunction with the Project for Excellence in Journalism’s News Coverage Index, an ongoing content analysis of the news. The News Coverage Index catalogues the news from top news organizations across five major sectors of the media: newspapers, network television, cable television, radio and the internet. Each week (from Sunday through Friday) PEJ will compile this data to identify the top stories for the week. The News Interest Index survey will collect data from Friday through Monday to gauge public interest in the most covered stories of the week.

Results for the weekly surveys are based on telephone interviews among a nationwide sample of approximately 1,000 adults, 18 years of age or older, conducted under the direction of ORC (Opinion Research Corporation). For results based on the total sample, one can say with 95% confidence that the error attributable to sampling is plus or minus 3.5 percentage points.

In addition to sampling error, one should bear in mind that question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of opinion polls, and that results based on subgroups will have larger margins of error.

For more information about the Project for Excellence in Journalism’s News Coverage Index, go to www.journalism.org.

In spite of their general criticisms of the media, Americans have good things to say about the major broadcast and cable news networks. The public draws few distinctions among the news divisions of the big three broadcast networks. There is much less consensus about the major cable news networks. Nearly half of the public sees real differences among CNN, the Fox News Channel and MSNBC, but four-in ten say the cable news outlets are all pretty much the same. National Public Radio is less well known to the public, but receives generally positive evaluations from those who can rate it.

When asked to name the one word that best describes their impression of six major news organizations, “good” is the word that comes to mind most often for each one. Beyond that, the big three broadcast networks — ABC, CBS and NBC — are most often described as “OK.” Other top descriptors for the networks include “biased,” “liberal” and “informative.”

CNN is the most recognizable news network among the six tested in the poll. Roughly 80% of respondents were able to come up with a word to describe CNN. After “good,” the most frequently used word was “informative.” The words “liberal,” “news” and “great” also made CNN’s top six list.

The Fox News cable channel is the only outlet for which “conservative” and “Republican” were mentioned. Other descriptions of Fox included “excellent,” “OK,” “biased,” and “like it.”

The top words used to describe NPR included “excellent,” and “informative.” “Liberal” was mentioned about as often in describing NPR as it was for CNN and the major broadcast networks, though “biased” was mentioned less often for NPR.

Cable Audiences Make Deliberate Choices

In general, the public sees few differences among the three broadcast networks. Fully 74% say ABC News, CBS News and NBC News are all pretty much the same. Only 18% say there are real differences between the three. But impressions of the three major cable news networks differ substantially. While 40% of the public says CNN, the Fox News cable channel and MSNBC are pretty much the same, 48% see real differences among the three.

The feeling that the three broadcast networks are all pretty much the same is shared by network and cable news viewers alike. When it comes to evaluations of the cable news networks, however, cable viewers themselves are among the most likely to draw distinctions among the three major outlets. Among regular viewers of CNN, Fox and MSNBC, roughly 60% say that real differences separate the cable news networks. This compares with 48% of the general public and 44% of regular viewers of the big three broadcast networks.

In addition, views of the cable networks differ sharply by education and partisanship. College graduates are much more likely than non-college graduates to see real differences between CNN, Fox and MSNBC. And Republicans are more likely than Democrats to see differences. Among Republicans, 57% say there are real differences among the three major cable news networks; only 33% say the cable networks are all the same. Democrats are evenly split on this issue: 45% say there are real differences, 46% say the cable networks are all the same.

These findings are based on the most recent installment of the weekly News Interest Index, an ongoing project of the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press. The index, building on the Center’s longstanding research into public attentiveness to major news stories, examines news interest as it relates to the news media’s agenda. The weekly survey is conducted in conjunction with The Project for Excellence in Journalism‘s News Coverage Index, which monitors the news reported by major newspaper, television, radio and online news outlets on an ongoing basis.

Iraq and Immigration Top News Interest Index

In the news this week, the public remained focused on the Iraq war while the national news media divided their time fairly evenly among a host of domestic and international issues. Three-in-ten Americans followed events in Iraq very closely last week, and fully a third listed Iraq as the single news story they followed more closely than any other. The media devoted 7% of overall coverage for the week to events on the ground in Iraq.

The most heavily covered news story of the week was the debate in Washington over a new immigration policy. Fully 10% of the newshole was devoted to this story as George Bush and congressional leaders attempted to keep the controversial reform legislation alive. The public paid fairly close attention to the immigration debate: 22% followed the story very closely and 17% said this was the story they followed more closely than any other.

Public interest in the 2008 presidential campaign remained steady last week. Despite the absence of major campaign events or debates, 17% of the public followed campaign news very closely and 10% listed this as their top story. The media devoted 7% of its overall coverage to the campaign.

The violent conflict between rival Palestinian groups was the second most heavily covered news story of the week (9% of the newshole). One-in-five Americans followed this story very closely, and 7% said it was their most closely followed story.

New developments in the U.S. attorney scandal put that story back in the media’s top tier. This was the fifth most heavily covered story of the week (3% of the newshole). The public is paying somewhat less attention to the story now than it had been in March and early April. Democrats continue to follow this story much more closely than do Republicans.

Only a small segment of the public paid close attention to the recent problems aboard the international space station — 7% followed this story very closely and 4% listed it as their top story of the week. Ten years ago when the Russian space station Mir experienced problems, the American public was somewhat more interested.

About the News Interest Index

The News Interest Index is a weekly survey conducted by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press aimed at gauging the public’s interest in and reaction to major news events.

This project has been undertaken in conjunction with the Project for Excellence in Journalism’s News Coverage Index, an ongoing content analysis of the news. The News Coverage Index catalogues the news from top news organizations across five major sectors of the media: newspapers, network television, cable television, radio and the internet. Each week (from Sunday through Friday) PEJ will compile this data to identify the top stories for the week. The News Interest Index survey will collect data from Friday through Monday to gauge public interest in the most covered stories of the week.

Results for the weekly surveys are based on telephone interviews among a nationwide sample of approximately 1,000 adults, 18 years of age or older, conducted under the direction of ORC (Opinion Research Corporation). For results based on the total sample, one can say with 95% confidence that the error attributable to sampling is plus or minus 3.5 percentage points.

In addition to sampling error, one should bear in mind that question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of opinion polls, and that results based on subgroups will have larger margins of error.

For more information about the Project for Excellence in Journalism’s News Coverage Index, go to journalism.org.

The increasingly fragmented media landscape has diminished the prominence of the nation’s top journalists. Two decades ago, the vast majority of Americans had a “favorite” journalist or news person, and the top picks were representatives of the big three broadcast television networks. Today, only a slim majority can name the journalist they admire most and the preferences are much more scattered. Reflecting the myriad choices news consumers have today, the top ten journalists named by the public are drawn from the networks, cable news channels, public television and even Comedy Central.

In another sign of the times, the internet was a major source of news about the recent downturn in the stock market. One-in-five Americans who were paying at least some attention to the stock market news say they first heard about the drop in stocks by going online. After a major market tumble in 1997 only 2% of those following the news story said they first heard about it online. Far fewer Americans got the recent news about the market from television compared to 10 years ago. Among those who were following the stock market news very closely, the internet was an even bigger source of information. Fully 29% of this group first heard about the market downturn online, only 40% heard the news on television (down from 66% in 1997).

Top Stories of the Week

Overall, the stock market was in the top tier of news stories, both in terms of public interest and news coverage during the week of Feb. 26. In a week crowded with news, the situation in Iraq maintained the top spot, as 37% of the public followed this story very closely and 30% listed it as the story they followed most closely. News about Iraq, both the policy debate and events on the ground, made up 11% of the newshole for the week. The public also paid very close attention to the deadly tornadoes in the South. Fully one-third followed this story very closely and 20% listed it as their top story. News coverage of the tornadoes, which occurred late in the week, made up 6% of the newshole.

These findings are based on the most recent installment of the weekly News Interest Index, an ongoing project of the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press. The index, building on the Center’s longstanding research into public attentiveness to major news stories, examines news interest as it relates to the news media’s agenda. The weekly survey is conducted in conjunction with The Project for Excellence in Journalism‘s News Coverage Index, which monitors the news reported by major newspaper, television, radio and online news outlets on an ongoing basis.

Interest in the Anna Nicole Smith saga remained about the same last week, in spite of the fact that media coverage of the story dropped off significantly. Some 14% of the public followed the Smith story very closely (basically unchanged from 13% the previous week), and 13% listed Smith’s death when asked which story they had followed most closely. As has been the case since the story broke, younger women remain the most riveted by Smith’s story. Women under age 50 were nearly three times more likely than men in that same age group to say Smith’s death was the story they followed most closely last week (23% vs. 8%, respectively).

Other top stories of the week included the 2008 presidential campaign and the terrorist bombing in Afghanistan outside a base where Vice President Dick Cheney was staying. The campaign continues to attract more attention than the 2004 presidential contest did in its early stages. The Afghanistan bombing was followed very closely by 19% of the public; 3% said this was the story they followed most closely. News coverage of this, which went beyond the bombing to include the broader situation in Afghanistan, was substantial (4% of the newshole).

Today’s Favorite Journalists

Looking at the list of most admired journalists, no individual news person is named by more than 5% of the public. In fact, the differences among the top 3, Katie Couric, Bill O’Reilly, and Charles Gibson, are not statistically significant. In 1987 Dan Rather stood out among his colleagues with 11% of the public naming him as their favorite journalist.

Some of today’s top journalists appeal to distinct constituencies reflecting the nature of their audiences. For example, Bill O’Reilly tops the list of most admired journalists among Republicans — 10% name the Fox News Channel talk show host. Only 2% of Democrats and Independents name O’Reilly. Much of Katie Couric’s support comes from women: 7% of women name Couric as the news person they admire most compared to 2% of men. And Jon Stewart, host of the Daily Show on Comedy Central, is popular mainly with young people. Among those under age 30, 6% say Stewart is their favorite journalist, making him along with O’Reilly the top pick among this age group. This compares with less than 1% of those over age 30, who admire Stewart most.

Online News Sources

When the U.S. stock market plunged over 400 points last week, Americans heard the news from a wide variety of sources. While a plurality of Americans learned about the downturn from television, the internet was a much more important source of news this year than it had been in November 1997 when stocks fell over 500 points in a day. In 1997, 59% of those who were paying at least some attention to the stock market fall first heard the news on television, this compares with 43% today. The percent of the public who heard the stock market news online increased ten-fold from 1997 to today. Roughly one-in-five (19%) heard about the market from listening to the radio (unchanged from 1997), 8% heard about it from talking to others (down slightly from 1997), and 9% heard about it by reading a newspaper (up marginally from 1997).

Among those who did hear the news on television, equal percentages cited hearing it on cable news channels and network news. A smaller percentage heard the news on their local stations. In 1997, network had a slight advantage over cable.

About the News Interest Index

The News Interest Index is a weekly survey conducted by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press aimed at gauging the public’s interest in and reaction to major news events.

This project has been undertaken in conjunction with the Project for Excellence in Journalism’s News Coverage Index, an ongoing content analysis of the news. The News Coverage Index catalogues the news from top news organizations across five major sectors of the media: newspapers, network television, cable television, radio and the internet. Each week (from Sunday through Friday) PEJ will compile this data to identify the top stories for the week. The News Interest Index survey will collect data from Friday through Monday to gauge public interest in the most covered stories of the week.

Results for the weekly surveys are based on telephone interviews among a nationwide sample of approximately 1,000 adults, 18 years of age or older, conducted under the direction of ORC (Opinion Research Corporation). For results based on the total sample, one can say with 95% confidence that the error attributable to sampling is plus or minus 3.5 percentage points.

In addition to sampling error, one should bear in mind that question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of opinion polls, and that results based on subgroups will have larger margins of error.

For more information about the Project for Excellence in Journalism’s News Coverage Index, go to www.journalism.org.