Ouch. Zogby did a poll right after the election that found Americans don't really trust the media and that Republicans are more distrustful than Democrats -- big surprise. Here's the distressing part:
Nearly 80% of respondents consider national television news to be unreliable and 84% consider radio to be unreliable.
According to 37.6% of those surveyed, news sources on the Internet are considered to be the most reliable
Now, I don't want to get into the whole "Internet is the most trusted source for news" debate I'm sure others will want to engage in. TV and radio can defend themselves. But newspapers are so little regarded that they aren't even asked about? We may be in deep trouble right now, but a great deal of the news on TV, radio and the Internet, originates with newspapers, OK? Sorry, feel better now.
Comments
I have faith in the News Sentinel, but another paper (unmentionable) filters the news its readers get. They will go as far as to say they report on a debate writing four different articles with over 800 words in each one and leave out what the position of a third candidate is. If the purpose of a newspaper is to present the news to the public, then they need to do so. If they want to be a tabloid then so be it.
After being asked questioned by this paper, I find that my replies are twisted and do not resemble what I stated. In fact, I took the next step in actually printing a detailed position paper only to find that this unmentionable paper cannot read or interpret English.
It is sad to say that I am one of those who trusts several sources on the internet (verification) than I do newspapers.
If newspapers were to stop reporting the mud slinging and negative campaining and spent more time on presenting each candidate's positions on issues, then individuals would view newspapers in a more positive light.