|
 <
Previous | Next >
| Home
Introduction
| Commentary
| Survey Findings | Methodology
| Questionnaire
Press Going Too Easy on Bush
Bottom-Line Pressures Now Hurting Coverage, Say
Journalists
by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press
Overview
Section I: Views on Performance
Section II: Covering the President and the Campaign
Section III: Today's
Changing Newsroom
Section IV: Values and
the Press
NOTE: This report is also available on
the Pew Research Center Web
site.
Section II: Covering the President and the Campaign
Many journalists today feel that news media has lost its
critical edge - especially when it comes to coverage of the
Bush administration. Reporters and editors in national news
organizations, in particular, feel the press has gone too
easy on the Bush administration. Moreover, the perception
that news organizations have gone soft is not confined to
attitudes about coverage of Bush. An increasing number of
both national and local journalists feel the traditional criticism
of the press as too cynical is no longer valid. Indeed, on
both the national and local level, more fault the press for
being too timid than too cynical.
The journalists surveyed give middling ratings to national
news coverage of Bush's presidency. A narrow majority of national
journalists (53%) give the coverage a grade of A or B; local
journalists are far less generous in their grading of how
their colleagues in national news organizations have covered
Bush (43% A or B). In a similar survey in 1995, national journalists,
in particular, offered more positive opinions of coverage
of the Clinton administration (65% A or B).
The journalists are somewhat more positive in their assessments
of the presidential campaign. A majority of national journalists
(56%) say coverage of the campaign has been better than coverage
of the 2000 campaign. Local journalists are more divided:
46% say coverage of the current campaign is better than in
2000, while 34% say it is worse.
Differences Over Bush Coverage
Solid majorities of national print and TV journalists, as
well as Internet journalists, say the media has not been critical
enough in its coverage of the administration. A smaller plurality
of local print journalists agree (46%).
But local television journalists, on balance, feel the coverage
of the Bush administration has been fair. A plurality of this
group (44%) believes the coverage has been fair; moreover,
nearly as many say coverage has been too critical of the administration
(25%) as say it has been not critical enough (28%).
Ideological Divisions
Much has been made of the public's ideological divisions
in this election year, but journalists also are divided along
ideological lines over several issues, including press coverage
of the Bush administration. Liberals who work in national
and local news organizations overwhelmingly feel the press
has not been critical enough of the Bush administration. Roughly
two-thirds of liberal journalists (68%) express that view,
compared with 28% who say coverage has been fair and 3% who
believe the press has been too critical of the administration.
Self-described moderates offer a mixed judgment of the Bush
coverage - about the same percentages say it has not been
critical enough (44%) and fair (43%). But most conservatives
(53%) think the press has been too critical of the administration,
compared with 30% who view it as fair and 17% who think it
has been too critical.
Beyond Bush: Cynicism Concerns Decline
In the 1999 survey, narrow majorities of both national (53%)
and local (51%) journalists agreed that the statement, "the
press is too cynical," represented a valid criticism
of news organizations.
But there has been a dramatic decline in the percentage
of national and local journalists who feel the press can be
legitimately criticized for excessive cynicism. Just 37% of
national journalists and only slightly more local journalists
(40%) view the press as too cynical. This pattern is even
more apparent among Internet journalists: 24% view the press
as too cynical, compared with 48% five years ago.
Internet journalists, in particular, believe that the press
can be faulted for being too timid rather than too cynical
(56% too timid vs. 24% too cynical). Journalists working at
national news organizations agree (47% vs. 37%). But local
journalists are split: 42% view the press as too timid, 40%
too cynical.
Ideological Coverage - Valid Criticism?
Overall, news people are divided over whether journalists
today too often let their own ideological views show in their
reporting. Similar percentages of national (45%) and local
(43%) journalists view this as a valid criticism.
But local executives, in particular, approach this issue
very differently. Roughly seven-in-ten local news executives
(73%) say coverage too often reflects a journalist's ideology;
roughly six-in-ten national news executives (62%) agree that
this is not a valid criticism of the press.
By comparison, there is broad agreement across the spectrum
of reporters, managers and executives that is a bad thing
if news organizations take a "decidedly" ideological
point of view in their coverage of the news. Fully 72% of
national journalists and 74% of local journalists have a negative
view of news organizations taking a strongly ideological stance
in their coverage.
Fox's Outsized Impact
Most national and local journalists do not believe any national
daily news organization is "especially liberal"
in its news coverage. Roughly six-in-ten in both groups (62%
national/59% local) say no national daily news organization
strikes them as particularly liberal in its coverage. Among
the minority that names a specific news organization as being
especially liberal, the New York Times was mentioned most
frequently (20% national/17% local).
By contrast, solid majorities of both national and local
journalists say there is an organization that they think is
especially conservative - and for most the organization that
comes to mind is Fox News Channel. Fully 69% of national journalists
cited Fox News Channel as especially conservative in its coverage.
Fewer local journalists (42%) mentioned Fox; still, a much
higher percentage of local journalists named Fox than any
other single news organization, conservative or liberal.
Roughly two-thirds of self-described conservatives (68%)
could identify a specific news organization that is especially
liberal, and the same number (68%) could name a news organization
that is "especially conservative." But moderates
and liberals could identify conservative news organizations
far more often than liberal ones. Roughly three-quarters of
liberals (74%) and a majority of moderates (56%) say they
couldn't think of any news organization that is especially
liberal.
[top]
<
Previous | Next >
| Home
Introduction
| Commentary
| Survey Findings | Methodology
| Questionnaire
|
Back
to Journalism.org
