The vast majority of Americans say they followed coverage of the first presidential debate between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama, including 56% who followed the debate live. Most of these real-time viewers watched on television, but 11% of live debate watchers were “dual screeners,” following coverage on a computer or mobile device at the same time as following television coverage. Another 3% say they followed the debate live exclusively online.

The post-debate survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, conducted Oct. 4-7 among 1,006 adults, finds younger Americans are especially likely to be “dual-screeners,” following the debate live on both television and a computer or mobile device.

Overall, 32% of those younger than 40 say they followed the debate live online, including 22% who followed it both on television and online, and 10% who followed exclusively on a computer or mobile device. Those 40-to-64 are less likely to have followed live online (11%); just 1% followed only online, while 10% followed online as well as on television. Very few Americans 65 and older followed the debate live online (2%) and none followed live coverage exclusively on a computer or mobile device.

Sharing Debate Reactions Online

While Twitter and Facebook provide an outlet for a range of debate reactions, only a small share of Americans are actively participating in these conversations. Only about a third of those who followed the debate in real time online – representing 5% of the overall debate audience– say they shared their own reactions to the debate online. This includes 8% of live debate watchers younger than 40 and 5% of those 40-to-65. No real-time debate watchers 65 and older reported sharing their reactions online while the debate was going.

Television Top Source for Debate Coverage

Overall, 83% of Americans followed any coverage of the first presidential debate either live or after the debate had already occurred. As with live coverage, television is the dominant source, outpacing other traditional sources, such as newspapers and radio, as well as online sources and social networking sites.

Seven-in-ten Americans (70%) followed debate coverage on television, more than twice the percentage that turned to any other single source. About as many say they followed any debate coverage in newspapers (32%) as online or on a mobile device, such as a cell phone or tablet computer (29%). In addition, 22% say they got debate coverage from social networking sites like Facebook or Twitter. About the same percentage (24%) followed debate coverage on the radio.

Digital vs. Traditional Sources of Debate Coverage

About a third (36%) of Americans got any debate coverage online or from social networking sites; far more (78%) say they got coverage from traditional sources, including television, newspapers, or radio. Among those younger than 40, however, the gap is narrower: about half (51%) followed coverage online or on social networking sites, compared with 70% who followed coverage either on television, the radio, or in newspapers. About a third (35%) of those 40-to-64 say they followed debate coverage online or on social networks, compared with 81% who got any coverage through television, newspapers, or the radio. Just 15% of those 65 and older followed the debate digitally; 80% say they turned to traditional sources for debate coverage.

The transformation of the nation’s news landscape has already taken a heavy toll on print news sources, particularly print newspapers. But there are now signs that television news – which so far has held onto its audience through the rise of the internet – also is increasingly vulnerable, as it may be losing its hold on the next generation of news consumers.

Online and digital news consumption, meanwhile, continues to increase, with many more people now getting news on cell phones, tablets or other mobile platforms. And perhaps the most dramatic change in the news environment has been the rise of social networking sites. The percentage of Americans saying they saw news or news headlines on a social networking site yesterday has doubled – from 9% to 19% – since 2010. Among adults younger than age 30, as many saw news on a social networking site the previous day (33%) as saw any television news (34%), with just 13% having read a newspaper either in print or digital form.

These are among the principal findings of the Pew Research Center’s biennial news consumption survey, which has tracked patterns in news use for nearly two decades. The latest survey was conducted May 9-June 3, 2012, among 3,003 adults. For more on the growth of mobile technology, see the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism report: “The Explosion in Mobile Audiences and a Close Look at what it Means for News,” released Oct. 1, 2012.

The proportion of Americans who read news on a printed page – in newspapers and magazines – continues to decline, even as online readership has offset some of these losses. Just 23% say they read a print newspaper yesterday, down only slightly since 2010 (26%), but off by about half since 2000 (47%).

The decline of print on paper spans beyond just newspapers. The proportion reading a magazine in print yesterday has declined over the same period (26% in 2000, 18% today). And as email, text messaging and social networking become dominant forms of communication, the percentage saying they wrote or received a personal letter the previous day also has fallen, from 20% in 2006 to 12% currently. There has been no decrease in recent years in the percentage reading a book on a typical day, but a growing share is now reading through an electronic or audio device.

While print sources have suffered readership losses in recent years, television news viewership has remained more stable. Currently, 55% say they watched the news or a news program on television yesterday, little changed from recent years. But there are signs this may also change. Only about a third (34%) of those younger than 30 say they watched TV news yesterday; in 2006, nearly half of young people (49%) said they watched TV news the prior day. Among older age groups, the percentages saying they watched TV yesterday has not changed significantly over this period.

The changing demographics of the TV news audience are particularly noticeable in the audiences for local and cable news. The overall share of Americans saying they regularly watch local television news has slipped from 54% in 2006 to 48% today – and in that regard it remains one of the news sources with the broadest reach. But the number of 18-to-29 year-olds regularly watching local news has fallen from 42% in 2006 to 28% today.

Over this same period, the regular audience for cable news also has aged. In 2006 and 2008, there were only modest age differences in regular cable news viewership. But in the current survey, more than twice as many of those 65 and older as those younger than 30 say they regularly watch cable news (51% vs. 23%).

CNN’s Losses Continue

Among individual cable news outlets, CNN’s regular audience has declined since 2008. Four years ago, nearly a quarter of Americans (24%) said they regularly watched CNN; that has fallen to 16% in the new survey.

Regular viewership for both Fox News and MSNBC has not changed much in recent years.
About one-in-five Americans (21%) say they regularly watch Fox News, while about half as many (11%) say they regularly watch MSNBC.

Print on Paper: Going, Going …

While Americans enjoy reading as much as ever – 51% say they enjoy reading a lot, little changed over the past two decades – a declining proportion gets news or reads other material on paper on a typical day. And there is new evidence in the survey of a shift in reading to electronic platforms.

In the new survey, only 29% say they read a newspaper yesterday, with just 23% reading a print newspaper. Over the past decade, the percentage reading a print newspaper has fallen by 18 points (from 41% to 23%). Somewhat more (38%) say they regularly read a daily newspaper, although this percentage also has declined, from 54% in 2004. Figures for newspaper readership may not include some people who read newspaper content on sites that aggregate news content, such as Google News or Yahoo News.

Over the past decade, there have been smaller declines in the percentages of Americans reading a magazine or book in print (six points and four points, respectively) than for newspapers.

Just as online newspaper readers make up an ever-greater share of all newspaper readers, so too are more magazine readers and book readers abandoning the printed page for tablets, digital books and other devices. In the current survey, 9% of those who said they read a magazine yesterday, and 20% who read a book, read them in a non-print format.

And substantial percentages of the regular readers of leading newspapers now read them digitally. Currently, 55% of regular New York Times readers say they read the paper mostly on a computer or mobile device, as do 48% of regular USA Today and 44% of Wall Street Journal readers.

By contrast, most readers of such magazines as Harpers, the Atlantic and the New Yorker still read them in print. But even for these magazines, nearly a quarter of regular readers (23%) say they read them mostly on a computer or digital device.

Online News: More Mobile, More Social

While traditional news platforms have lost audience, online news consumption has been undergoing major changes as well. Nearly one-in-five Americans (17%) say they got news yesterday on a mobile device yesterday, with the vast majority of these people (78%) getting news on their cell phone. Among smartphone owners, nearly a third (31%) got news yesterday on a mobile device.

The second major trend in online news consumption is the rise of news on social networks. Today, 19% of the public says they saw news or news headlines on social networking sites yesterday, up from 9% two years ago. And the percentage regularly getting news or news headlines on these sites has nearly tripled, from 7% to 20%.

In part, this is a byproduct of the explosive growth in social networking. In the current survey, 41% of all adults, including 47% of online adults, say they used Facebook or another social networking site yesterday. (For more on social networking, see surveys conducted by the Pew Internet & American Life Project.)

On top of the increase in social network use, the poll finds that news is also more prevalent on social networking sites. The share of users who saw news there yesterday nearly doubled from 19% to 36% between 2010 and 2012.

The increasing use of these sites for news has not just occurred among young people. In fact, those in their 30s are nearly as likely as those 18 to 24 to say they saw news or news headlines on Facebook or another social networking site yesterday (30% vs. 34%). And about a quarter of adults in their 40s (23%) saw news yesterday on social networks, up from just 8% in 2010.

The two trends in online news consumption – growing numbers getting news via mobile devices and the increasing use of social networks – are complementary. Overall, 55% of Americans access the internet on a mobile device, such as a cell phone or tablet; among this group, 30% say they saw news on social networking sites yesterday. That compares with just 9% of Americans who are online but do not access the internet on a mobile device.

Getting News on Twitter

While news gathering is very common among Twitter users, the overall reach is limited because the audience remains relatively small. About one-in-ten Americans (13%) ever use Twitter or read Twitter messages. By comparison, more than half (54%) ever use other social networking sites, such as Facebook, Google Plus or LinkedIn.

As a result, far fewer people get news on Twitter than on other social networking sites. Just 11% ever see news on Twitter, while 3% got news there yesterday. Nearly half of adults (47%) ever get news on Facebook and other social networking sites and 19% got news on one or more of those sites yesterday.

Nonetheless, Twitter users are increasingly getting news on the site and sharing news stories with others. Overall, 83% of Twitter users ever see news on Twitter and 26% saw news there yesterday; both percentages are up considerably from two years ago. And most Twitter users (59%) tweet or retweet news headlines on Twitter. About the same percentage of users of Facebook and other social networks (61%) use those sites for sharing news or news headlines.

Large majorities of Americans are following coverage of the Olympic Games in London. Nearly eight-in-ten (78%) say they have watched or followed Olympic coverage either on television, online or on social networks.

Television remains far-and-away the leading platform for Olympic coverage; 73% say they have watched coverage on television. Still, 17% say they have watched online or digitally and 12% report they have followed Olympic coverage on social networking sites like Facebook or Twitter. Most Olympic followers (68%) say they are watching events in the evening after they have already occurred. At the same time, almost a quarter (23%) say they are watching live during the day.

The latest national survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press and the Pew Internet & American Life Project, conducted August 2-5, 2012 among 1,005 adults, finds that NBC’s coverage of the Olympics receives high marks from the public. Overall, 76% of Olympic watchers describe the coverage as excellent (29%) or good (47%); 18% describe it as only fair (13%) or poor (5%).

Although there has been criticism of NBC’s coverage expressed online on social media sites like Twitter, the coverage is rated about equally well by those who are watching online and following on social networks (70% excellent/good) and those watching on television (77%). There is also little difference in the ratings given by those watching events live (85% excellent/good) and those watching in the evening after the events have occurred (75%).

Young people under the age of 30 are much more likely to have followed Olympic coverage on social networking sites than are older Americans. About three-in-ten (31%) of those ages 18-29 have followed coverage on social networking sites like Facebook or Twitter, compared with 11% of those 30-49, 6% of those 50-64, and just 2% of those 65 and older.

Following Olympic coverage online and on social networks appears to be a supplement rather than a replacement for television viewing. Among those following the Olympics online or on social networks, most (79%) say they are also watching Olympic coverage on television.

The poll finds that those following coverage online or on social networks are no more likely to say they are watching events live than those watching Olympic coverage on television.

With a contested primary in only one party this year, fewer Americans are closely following news about the presidential campaign than four years ago. As a consequence, long-term declines in the number of people getting campaign news from such sources as local TV and network news have steepened, and even the number gathering campaign news online, which had nearly tripled between 2000 and 2008, has leveled off in 2012.

The one constant over the course of the past four elections is the reach of cable news. Currently, 36% of Americans say they are regularly learning about the candidates or campaign on cable news networks. That is virtually unchanged from previous campaigns, yet cable news is now the top regular source for campaign news.

The cable networks also hosted most of the candidate debates, which stand out as a particularly interesting aspect of the campaign. Nearly half of Republicans (47%) have watched a GOP debate during this campaign, up from 32% at a comparable point four years ago.

In contrast to cable, the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press’ 2012 campaign news survey, conducted Jan. 4-8 among 1,507 adults nationwide, finds broad declines in the numbers getting campaign news from newspapers, and local and network TV news. Just 20% say they regularly learn something about the presidential campaign or candidates from their local daily newspapers. In 2008, 31% said they got campaign news from their daily newspaper and 40% did so in the 2000 election cycle. There are comparable declines in the share regularly getting campaign information from network evening news programs and local TV news. For all three of these sources, the rate of decline slowed during the dramatic 2008 election cycle, but has again continued on a downward track.

In previous campaigns, declining figures for traditional sources were at least partly offset by increasing numbers turning to the internet. But that is not the case in 2012, as the number regularly getting campaign news online has leveled off. This is largely due to a lack of interest in the early 2012 campaign among younger Americans, who have traditionally been the broadest internet news consumers, and who also are less apt to be Republicans.

Over the month of January, only 20% of those younger than 30 said they were following news about the campaign very closely, down from 31% in January 2008. In fact, on the weekend Newt Gingrich won a dramatic victory in the South Carolina primary, young people expressed as much interest in a battle over online piracy legislation as they did in the campaign. (See “Cruise Ship Accident, Election Top Public’s Interests,” Jan. 24, 2012).

As campaign interest among young people has declined, fewer say they are going online for campaign news. Just 29% of those younger than 30 regularly learn something about the campaign online, down from 42% four years ago. Early in the 2008 campaign, people under age 30 were twice as likely as people 30 and older to get campaign information online. There is far less of an age gap today.

While other sources have advanced and receded, cable news networks have held their own over the past four election cycles. Moreover, cable news reaches a substantial number across age and partisan lines. To be sure, Republicans and Democrats are increasingly turning to different cable networks for their campaign news. When asked where they get most of their campaign news, far more Republicans than Democrats cite Fox News, while Democrats are much more likely than Republicans to cite CNN and MSNBC.

Few Learning from Social Networks

Many of the newest internet tools for getting campaign information, including social networking, are being used by a relatively limited audience. One-in-five Americans (20%) say they regularly or sometimes get campaign information from Facebook and just one-in-twenty (5%) say the same about Twitter. Even among Facebook and Twitter users, most say they hardly ever or never learn about the campaign or candidates through those sources.

About half (52%) of Americans say they at least sometimes learn about the campaign from websites or apps of TV, newspaper, magazine or radio news organizations. Slightly more than a third (36%) regularly or sometimes learn from websites or apps of news sources that are only available online.

When respondents are asked to name the specific internet sources they turn to for campaign news and information, the most frequently cited are CNN (by 24% of those who get campaign news online), Yahoo (22%), Google (13%), Fox News (10%), MSN (9%) and MSNBC (8%). Politically-oriented sites like Huffington Post and the Drudge Report are each mentioned by only 2% of those who get campaign news online.

More See Biased Coverage

The survey finds that the number saying there is a great deal of political bias in the news has risen to a new high, with the most intense criticism coming from Tea Party Republicans. Currently, 37% of Americans say there is a great deal of bias in news coverage and 30% say there is a fair amount of bias. Far fewer see not too much bias (21%) or none at all (10%). The percentage saying there is a great deal of bias has increased six points, from 31% to 37%, since 2008.

About three-quarters (74%) of Republicans who agree with the Tea Party movement say there is a great deal of bias – at least twice the percentage as in any other political group, including non-Tea Party Republicans (33%) and liberal Democrats (36%). Among news audiences, those who cite the Fox News Channel or the radio as their main source of campaign news are the most likely to say there is a great deal of bias in news coverage.

Campaign Outreach

While new technology allows campaigns and groups multiple ways to reach out to voters, campaign commercials have by far the widest reach. Fully 72% of registered voters nationwide report having seen or heard campaign commercials related to the 2012 presidential campaign. That is far more than the percentages saying they have received  email from a campaign or political group (16%), visited a candidate’s website (15%) or followed a candidate’s updates on Twitter or Facebook (6%).

While small, the number of people who track candidates on social networking has grown. At this point in the 2008 campaign, just 3% said they had signed up as a “friend” of a candidate on a social networking site.

One-in-four (25%) say they have already received pre-recorded telephone calls about the campaign, often referred to as “robocalls.” That is comparable to the level early in the 2008 presidential campaign. Only about a third as many (8%) have gotten phone calls from a live person. Telephone outreach has not been limited to Republicans. Democrats and Democratic-leaning voters are just as likely as Republicans and Republican leaners to have received live phone calls (8% each), and only slightly less likely to have received campaign robocalls (23% vs. 28% of Republicans).

Overall, 7% of registered voters say they have contributed money to a campaign, about the level measured early in the 2008 campaign (8% in Nov. 2007). But unlike four years ago, Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters are more likely than Republicans and Republican leaners to say they have contributed to a candidate – presumably Obama – in the 2012 campaign.

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.

With the economy still struggling and the nation involved in multiple military operations overseas, the public’s political mood is fractious. In this environment, many political attitudes have become more doctrinaire at both ends of the ideological spectrum, a polarization that reflects the current atmosphere in Washington.

Yet at the same time, a growing number of Americans are choosing not to identify with either political party, and the center of the political spectrum is increasingly diverse. Rather than being moderate, many of these independents hold extremely strong ideological positions on issues such as the role of government, immigration, the environment and social issues. But they combine these views in ways that defy liberal or conservative orthodoxy.

For political leaders in both parties, the challenge is not only one of appeasing ideological and moderate “wings” within their coalitions, but rather holding together remarkably disparate groups, many of whom have strong disagreements with core principles that have defined each party’s political character in recent years.

The most visible shift in the political landscape since Pew Research’s previous political typology in early 2005 is the emergence of a single bloc of across-the-board conservatives. The long-standing divide between economic, pro-business conservatives and social conservatives has blurred. Today, Staunch Conservatives take extremely conservative positions on nearly all issues – on the size and role of government, on economics, foreign policy, social issues and moral concerns. Most agree with the Tea Party and even more very strongly disapprove of Barack Obama’s job performance. A second core group of Republicans – Main Street Republicans – also is conservative, but less consistently so.

On the left, Solid Liberals express diametrically opposing views from the Staunch Conservatives on virtually every issue. While Solid Liberals are predominantly white, minorities make up greater shares of New Coalition Democrats – who include nearly equal numbers 0f whites, African Americans and Hispanics – and Hard-Pressed Democrats, who are about a third African American. Unlike Solid Liberals, both of these last two groups are highly religious and socially conservative. New Coalition Democrats are distinguished by their upbeat attitudes in the face of economic struggles.

Independents have played a determinative role in the last three national elections. But the three groups in the center of the political typology have very little in common, aside from their avoidance of partisan labels. Libertarians and Post-Moderns are largely white, well-educated and affluent. They also share a relatively secular outlook on some social issues, including homosexuality and abortion. But Republican-oriented Libertarians are far more critical of government, less supportive of environmental regulations, and more supportive of business than are Post-Moderns, most of whom lean Democratic.

Disaffecteds, the other main group of independents, are financially stressed and cynical about politics. Most lean to the Republican Party, though they differ from the core Republican groups in their support for increased government aid to the poor. Another group in the center, Bystanders, largely consign themselves to the political sidelines and for the most part are not included in this analysis.

These are the principal findings of the political typology study by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, which sorts Americans into cohesive groups based on values, political beliefs, and party affiliation. The new study is based on two surveys with a combined sample of 3,029 adults, conducted Feb. 22-Mar. 14, 2011 and a smaller callback survey conducted April 7-10, 2011 with 1,432 of the same respondents.

This is the fifth typology created by the Pew Research Center since 1987. Many of the groups identified in the current analysis are similar to those in past typologies, reflecting the continuing importance of a number of key beliefs and values. But there are a number of critical differences as well.

The new groupings underscore the substantial political changes that have occurred since the spring of 2005, when the previous typology was released. Today, there are two core Republican groups, compared with three in 2005, to some extent reflecting a decline in GOP party affiliation. However, Democrats have not made gains in party identification. Rather, there has been a sharp rise in the percentage of independents – from 30% in 2005 to 37% currently. Today, there are three disparate groups of independents, compared with two in 2005.

While Republicans trail the Democrats in party affiliation, they enjoy advantages in other areas: The two core GOP groups are more homogenous – demographically and ideologically – than are the three core Democratic groups. And socioeconomic differences are more apparent on the left: Nearly half of Solid Liberals (49%) are college graduates, compared with 27% of New Coalition Democrats and just 13% of Hard-Pressed Democrats.

The GOP still enjoys an intensity advantage, which proved to be a crucial factor in the Republicans’ victories in the 2010 midterm elections. For example, the GOP’s core groups – Staunch Conservatives and Main Street Republicans – express strongly negative opinions about last year’s health care legislation, while reactions among the Democratic groups are more mixed. Even Solid Liberals offer only tepid support for the bill – 43% say it will have a mostly positive impact on the nation’s health care, while somewhat more (51%) say it will have a mixed effect.

However, maintaining solid support among the GOP-oriented groups in the center of the typology represents a formidable challenge for Republicans. The cross-pressured Disaffecteds highlight this challenge. They were an important part of the GOP coalition in 2010, but were lackluster supporters of John McCain two years earlier.

Like the core GOP groups, most Disaffecteds (73%) view government as nearly always wasteful and inefficient. At the same time, a solid majority of Disaffecteds (61%) say the government should do more to help needy Americans even if that means going deeper into debt.

Libertarians, the other Republican-leaning group, overwhelmingly oppose expanding aid for the poor if it means increasing the nation’s debt. Yet on immigration and homosexuality, Libertarians’ views differ markedly from those of the core Republican groups. Fully 71% of Libertarians say homosexuality should be accepted by society; nearly as many Staunch Conservatives (68%) say it should be discouraged.

Many of the political values and attitudes of Post-Moderns, young, Democratically-oriented independents, fit awkwardly with those of core Democratic groups. Post-Moderns overwhelmingly voted for Obama in 2008, but their turnout fell off dramatically last fall, which contributed to the Democrats’ poor showing in the midterms. Compared with the core Democratic groups, Post-Moderns are less supportive of increased aid for the needy and are far less likely to view racial discrimination as the main obstacle to African American progress.

Partisan Dividing Line: Views of Government

The new typology finds a deep and continuing divide between the two parties, as well as differences within both partisan coalitions. But the nature of the partisan divide has changed substantially over time.

More than in the recent past, attitudes about government separate Democrats from Republicans, and it is these beliefs that are most correlated with political preferences looking ahead to 2012. In 2005, at the height of the Iraq war and shortly after an election in which national security was a dominant issue, opinions about assertiveness in foreign affairs almost completely distinguished Democrats from Republicans. Partisan divisions over national security remain, but in an era when the public’s focus is more inward-looking, they are less pronounced.

As in recent years, beliefs about the environment, business, immigration and the challenges faced by African Americans are important fissures between the parties, though to some extent within them as well.

In general, there is far more agreement across the two core GOP groups than the three core Democratic groups. Staunch Conservatives and Main Street Republicans express highly critical opinions about government performance and are both deeply skeptical of increased government aid to the poor if it means adding to the debt.

Yet Staunch Conservatives have much more positive opinions about business than do Main Street Republicans. Attitudes about the environment also divide the two core GOP groups: 92% of Staunch Conservatives say that stricter environmental laws cost too many jobs and hurt the economy; just 22% of Main Street Republicans agree.

The differences among core Democratic groups show up across a wider range of fundamental political values. Social and moral issues divide Solid Liberals, who are more secular, from other Democratic groups who are much more religious.

Opinions about business, immigration and the economic impact of environmental laws and regulations also divide the Democratic groups. For instance, more than half of Hard-Pressed Democrats (54%) say that stricter environmental laws and regulations cost too many jobs and hurt the economy; just 22% of New Coalition Democrats and 7% of Solid Liberals share this view.

Race and ethnicity are factors in some of the opinion differences among Democrats. New Coalition Democrats, who are roughly a quarter Hispanic, have positive views of immigrants. Fully 70% say immigrants strengthen the country because of their hard work and talents.

Hard-Pressed Democrats – who are mostly white and African American – take a dim view of immigrants’ contributions. Just 13% say immigrants strengthen the country, while 76% say they are a burden because they take jobs and health care.

Age also is a factor in partisanship and political values. Younger people are more numerous on the left, and older people on the right. However, many young people think of themselves as independents rather than as Democrats. Post-Moderns, Democratic-oriented independents, are by far the youngest group in the typology, but they often deviate from traditional Democratic orthodoxy and are not consistent voters.

Older people, who have increasingly voted Republican in recent years, are found disproportionately in the Staunch Conservative bloc – 61% are 50 or older. And this group is highly politically engaged; 75% say they follow government and public affairs most of the time.

Staunch Conservatives also include by far the largest share of Tea Party supporters – 72% of Staunch Conservatives agree with the movement. The Tea Party’s appeal is deeper than it is wide. There is no other typology group in which a majority agrees with the Tea Party. Aside from Staunch Conservatives, Libertarians are most supportive (44% agree).

The survey suggests that while the Tea Party is a galvanizing force on the right, strong disapproval of Barack Obama is an even more powerful unifying factor among fervent conservatives. No fewer than 84% of Staunch Conservatives strongly disapprove of Obama’s job performance and 70% rate him very unfavorably personally. Ardent support for Obama on the left is no match for this – 64% of Solid Liberals strongly approve of him, and 45% rate him very favorably.

More than two years into office, Obama’s personal image is positive though his job approval ratings are mixed. Yet doubts about Obama’s background and biography persist. More than one-in-five Americans (23%) say, incorrectly, that Obama was born outside the United States; another 22% are not sure where Obama was born. Nearly half of Staunch Conservatives (47%) and 35% of Main Street Republicans say that Obama was born in another country. Only among Solid Liberals is there near total agreement that Obama was, in fact, born in the United States (95%). (NOTE: The survey was conducted before President Obama released his long-form birth certificate on April 27.)

Other Major Findings

• Majorities in most typology groups say the country will need both to cut spending and raise taxes to reduce the budget deficit. Staunch Conservatives are the exception – 59% say the focus should only be on cutting spending.
• Core GOP groups largely prefer elected officials who stick to their positions rather than those who compromise. Solid Liberals overwhelmingly prefer officials who compromise, but the other two Democratic groups do not.
• For Staunch Conservatives it is still “Drill, Baby, Drill” – 72% say that expanding exploration for and production of oil, coal and natural gas is the more important energy priority. In most other typology groups, majorities say developing alternatives is more important.
• Republican groups say the Supreme Court should base rulings on its interpretation of the Constitution “as originally written.” Democratic groups say the Court should base its rulings on what the Constitution means today.
• Main Street Republicans and GOP-oriented Disaffecteds are far more likely than Staunch Conservatives or Libertarians to favor a significant government role in reducing childhood obesity.
• Solid Liberals are the only typology group in which a majority (54%) views democracy as more important than stability in the Middle East. Other groups say stable governments are more important or are divided on this question.
• New Coalition Democrats are more likely than the other core Democratic groups to say that most people can make it if they are willing to work hard.
• More Staunch Conservatives regularly watch Fox News than regularly watch CNN, MSNBC and the nightly network news broadcasts combined.
• There are few points on which all the typology groups can agree, but cynicism about politicians is one. Majorities across all eight groups, as well as Bystanders, say elected officials lose touch with the people pretty quickly.
• Staunch Conservatives overwhelmingly want to get tougher with China on economic issues. Across other typology groups, there is far more support for building stronger economic relations with China.
• The allied airstrikes in Libya divide Democratic groups. Solid Liberals and New Coalition Democrats favor the airstrikes, but about as many Hard-Pressed Democrats favor as oppose the operation.
• Michelle Obama is popular with Main Street Republicans, as well as most other typology groups. But Staunch Conservatives view the first lady unfavorably – and 43% view her very unfavorably.

Making the Typology

The 2011 typology divides the public into eight politically engaged groups, along with a ninth group of less engaged Bystanders. It is the fifth of its kind, following on previous studies in 1987, 1994, 1999 and 2005.

Using a statistical procedure called cluster analysis, individuals are assigned to one of the eight core typology groups based on their position on nine scales of social and political values – each of which is determined by responses to two or three survey questions – as well as their party identification. Several different cluster solutions were evaluated for their effectiveness in producing cohesive groups that are distinct from one another, substantively meaningful and large enough in size to be analytically practical. The final solution selected to produce the political typology was judged to be strongest from a statistical point of view and to be most persuasive from a substantive point of view. As in past typologies, a measure of political attentiveness and voting participation was used to extract the “Bystander” group, people who are largely not engaged or involved in politics, before performing the cluster analysis.

For a more complete description of the methodology used to create the typology, see About the Political Typology. For more information about the survey methodology seen About the Surveys.

The internet is slowly closing in on television as Americans’ main source of national and international news. Currently, 41% say they get most of their news about national and international news from the internet, which is little changed over the past two years but up 17 points since 2007. Television remains the most widely used source for national and international news – 66% of Americans say it is their main source of news – but that is down from 74% three years ago and 82% as recently as 2002.

The national survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, conducted Dec. 1-5, 2010 among 1,500 adults reached on cell phones and landlines, finds that more people continue to cite the internet than newspapers as their main source of news, reflecting both the growth of the internet, and the gradual decline in newspaper readership (from 34% in 2007 to 31% now). The proportion citing radio as their main source of national and international news has remained relatively stable in recent years; currently, 16% say it is their main source.

An analysis of how different generations are getting their news suggests that these trends are likely to continue. In 2010, for the first time, the internet has surpassed television as the main source of national and international news for people younger than 30. Since 2007, the number of 18 to 29 year olds citing the internet as their main source has nearly doubled, from 34% to 65%. Over this period, the number of young people citing television as their main news source has dropped from 68% to 52%.

Among those 30 to 49, the internet is on track to equal, or perhaps surpass, television as the main source of national and international news within the next few years. Currently, 48% say the internet is their main source – up 16 points from 2007 – and 63% cite television – down eight points.

The internet also has grown as a news source for people ages 50 to 64; currently 34% say the internet is their main source of national and international news, nearly equal to the number who cite newspapers (38%), though still far below television (71%). There has been relatively little change in the how people age 65 and older get their news. The internet has risen to 14% from 5% in 2007, but is still far behind newspapers (47%) and television (79%) as a main source.

The decline in the share of Americans who cite television as their main source of national and international news crosses all age groups. Over the past three years, the number saying TV is their main source has fallen 16 points among 18-29 year-olds, eight points among those 30 to 49, and six points among those age 50 and older.

TV News Still Dominates Among Less Educated

College graduates are about as likely to get most of their national and international news from the internet (51%) as television (54%). Those with some college are just as likely as college grads to cite the internet as their main source (51%), while 63% cite television. By contrast, just 29% of those with no more than a high school education cite the internet while more than twice as many (75%) cite television.

Similarly, those with household incomes of $75,000 or more are about as likely to get most of their news on the internet (54%) as from television (57%). People with household incomes under $30,000 are far more likely to cite television (72%) than the internet (34%).

There also are different patterns of news consumption across regions of the country. Notably, people living in the West are the most likely to cite the internet as their main source of national and international news (47% vs. 40% in other parts of the country), and the least likely to cite television (55% vs. 68% elsewhere).

Both Cable News and Broadcast News See Declines

Reflecting the slow decline in the proportion of people getting most of their national and international news from television, the numbers specifically citing cable news outlets or broadcast networks as their main news source has fallen. When asked where on television they get most of their news, 36% name a cable network such as CNN, the Fox News Channel or MSNBC; 22% name ABC News, CBS News or NBC News; and 16% say they get most of their national and international news from local news programming.

Compared with five years ago, the share citing a cable network as their main source is down seven points (from 43% to 36%), and the share citing a broadcast network is down eight points (from 30% to 22%). The local news figure has remained relatively constant over this period.

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 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.