CNN Remains TV's Most Trusted News Source - PEJ »
Posted By TimALoftis 1 year, 7 months ago in Arts & EntertainmentCNN remains the most trusted source among those surveyed, just slightly higher than the next most trusted sources CBS's 60 Minutes (27%), C-SPAN (25%) and Fox News (25%).
Read Full Story at stateofthemedia.org »
Submitted By:
TimALoftis
Welcome To Propeller !
If you like 'Social News' and making friends and conversation with both a mature and informed community - this site is for you ...
Also submitted:
Related Articles:
Why not submit a story?
Join the Discussion 
+ Add Comment
Comments So Far: 103
-
67%
Riverrat1 year, 7 months ago
Baloney!!!! How can we trust a news channel that only gives the bad news and the news as they see it, not as it really happens. How many times do you see anything positive that happens in Iraq, or for that matter what happens at home. Their stock answer is that good news does not sell papers or bring in viewers so find your good news somewhere elese.
Reply-
100%
ybdogsct1 year, 7 months ago
RIVERRAT:
"Baloney!!!! How can we trust a news channel that only gives the bad news and the news as they see it, not as it really happens."
Apparently, Fox News viewers scored the lowest on a current events quiz given during a nonpartisan, academic, peer-reviewed, published study by the University of Maryland. PBS and NPR viewers scored the highest.
http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/in
"The polling, conducted by the Program on International Policy (PIPA) at the University of Maryland and Knowledge Networks, also reveals that the frequency of these misperceptions varies significantly according to individuals' primary source of news. Those who primarily watch Fox News are significantly more likely to have misperceptions, while those who primarily listen to NPR or watch PBS are significantly less likely."
Reply -
44%
SantaM1 year, 7 months ago
Can someone explain to me this despisae for Dan Rather? As I understand it, he reported a story that turned out to be false. Right? But the story had well fabricated evidence and was indeed worthy of publication had it turned out to be true, no? And when it was discovered that the documents were not real, that was revealed as well. It's not like HE forged the documents, right? He was just reporting the news as he got it...
I guess I don't understand how he screwed up. By not knowing that they were forgeries? Because you can't expect an anchor to do an exhaustive CSI research project to authenticate all documents... I mean the documents themselves are generally sopposed as authentification...
It was revealed... he apologised... every news anchor and group has been fooled at one point or another and reported something that was later revealed to be untrue and/or fabricated, haven't they?
Remember Susan Smith? Nobody called for news anchors' heads when that wasn't true.
Reply -
-
-
33%
TimALoftis1 year, 7 months ago
note of interest from the article;
Fox News, on the other hand, has a loyal audience whose belief in what they see on the channel remains unchanged. The number of people who believe all or most of what they see on the channel didn't fall in 2006, making Fox News one of the few media outlets not to have suffered a decline.
Reply-
0%
Beau78901 year, 7 months ago
That is a very interesting quote from the article indeed.
It seems from some of the comments here that some interpret it to mean that people have lost faith in sources other than Fox News, and that therefore Fox is most reliable. I'd argue, on the other hand, that the loyal Fox News audience gets no other news--their faith is intractable.
I'd like to see a poll asking viewers of each network if they ALSO look to other sources for news. I'd like to know which other sources, and how many. I'd bet that Fox News viewers would score lowest on this multiple-source poll.
Reply -
-
0%
jordan111 year, 7 months ago
Fox News, on the other hand, has a loyal audience whose belief in what they see on the channel remains unchanged. The number of people who believe all or most of what they see on the channel didn't fall in 2006, making Fox News one of the few media outlets not to have suffered a decline.>>>>>
Which only goes to prove, that ignorance is bliss.
Reply to Comment
Reply
-
-
-
0%
TimALoftis1 year, 7 months ago
I agree, Stephend. I am lucky that my local cable service carries CNN International and BBC. I find them to be much better than the domestic cable news channels that interject far to much opinion as well fluff...like the Anna Nicole crap. I also find the PBS Newshour with Jim Lehrer to be quite good also.
Reply -
50%
david_nwpa1 year, 7 months ago
Although I like the BBC, I frequently read and gather a considerable amount of news from Deutsch Welle. It helps that I speak fluent German, and clearly this is not a news source for all. However, the website translates all its articles into quite clear English. The lack of bias from the German news is amazing.
I am also persuaded by what I have seen and read from CBC. I am curious what my neighbors to the north have to say about their Canadian Broadcast news.
Reply
-
-
-
91%
dicktater1 year, 7 months ago
Why was my comment truncated?
BOMBSHELL: 9/11 COVER-UP UNRAVELING
CNN, BBC 24 Reports Conclusively Prove Media Prior Knowledge and False-Start Scripting of Building 7 Controlled Demolition
http://www.jonesreport.com/articles/270207_bbc_los
Reply -
50%
jaern1 year, 7 months ago
What would we do if we actually had an unbiased news source? I think Nancy Grace might implode!
Reply
-
-
-
-
100%
QUESTIONMAN1 year, 7 months ago
The only News Channel that we can trust only in a 50 % is BBC, all the others CNN, FOXTEL and ABC only comply what the Government of USA is allowing to tell to the public. Reuters has lost also his independence and France Press even is not more trustworsty. The World now is utterly with controlled news. For Real News just see rense.com all the others are just garbage and control, this unfortunately is the New Goerge Orwell World of TransNationals controlled news.
Reply-
90%
TheVisionary1 year, 7 months ago
While I'm not trying to debate that there is some corruption in corporate media, where's the support for your claims? I gladly check links if provided.
Reply
-
-
-
100%
TimALoftis1 year, 7 months ago
The only good thing about Nancy Grace and Glen Beck is that they are on Headline News Prime and not on the primary CNN channel. I would love to see CNN move Lou Dobbs which is largely opinion over to Headline News prime as well. CNN should always try to stay with the 'Hard News' stuff. Ratings would suffer but overall respect would increase. I would go as far as moving Larry King to headline News as well.
Reply
-
-
-
100%
nostalgia1 year, 7 months ago
NelsonR
I have no idea which network had the most coverage. I do know that on many evenings, no matter which cable news channel I flipped to, the coverage was Anna Nicole Smith.
They all overdid the coverage of that and neglected more important news
Reply -
100%
ybdogsct1 year, 7 months ago
NELSONR:
"Does anyone know what news outlet had the most coverage overall. I really don't know but whoever it was, I rate it the worse media source."
http://www.newshounds.us/2007/02/26/gibson_journal
"Big Story host John Gibson, on his FOX radio program Friday 2/23/07, said: 'Oh, there's a war on, there's a war on. Maybe, just maybe, people are a little weary, Mr. [Anderson] Cooper [of CNN], of your war coverage, and they'd like a little something else. Maybe that's why they all thundered to this story...People want to hear about the Anna Nicole story, I'm happy to tell them."
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/05/fox-news-anna-
"The most lop-sided coverage by far was aired by Fox News, which featured only 10 references to Walter Reed compared to 121 of Anna Nicole. [MSNBC had 96 references, and CNN only made 40 references to Anna Nicole Smith in their news coverage.]
Reply-
100%
foksipayne1 year, 7 months ago
I'd have been happy to tell him to shove poor anna's corpse up his arse. all I want to know: Did Howie do it?
Reply
-
-
-
100%
jaern1 year, 7 months ago
I agree completely! I watched Fox News when a newscaster asked another reporter, "When will this stop being the top news story?"
I wanted to yell at the TV "When you stop making this a top news story!"
You expect this coverage from ET or E! but its a slow day in Baghdad when she continues to be a top story long after her death.
Reply
-
-
0%
ningyo1 year, 7 months ago
the graph says it all--fox steady up for the last 5 years--cnn dropping like a stone--but who's watching--cnn has about as many viewers as airport radar--and the print media is way behind that--the only people reading the NYT anymore are lib dems looking for manufactured news to write about on their blogs--
Reply-
0%
ybdogsct1 year, 7 months ago
NINGYO:
"the graph says it all--fox steady up for the last 5 years--cnn dropping like a stone"
Of course Fox has high ratings. They are the only network catering to the neocon and Evangelical Christian demographic. The middle and left portions of the political spectrum must be shared by PBS, NPR, ABC, CNN, NBC, CBS, etc.
NINGYO:
"the only people reading the NYT anymore are lib dems looking for manufactured news"
Ratings are not an accurate measure of journalistic integrity for the reason I cited above. The Pulitzer Award is the highest award given for investigative journalism and is a much more accurate and accepted (by the industry) metric for measuring the quality of journalism. Do you know how many Pulitzers Fox News has won? Do you know how many the New York Times has one? Let me give you a hint: the New York Times ALONE has won more Pulitzers than all Fox News broadcast and print affiliates COMBINED.
Reply -
-
100%
IcCaRus1 year, 7 months ago
ningyo-
"the graph says it all"
personally i think the current events quiz mentioned above says it all...
Faux News viewers scored the LOWEST on the test. no surprise at all to non-apologists...
did you also see that FAUX news viewers have the most misperceptions of all? again, NO surprise to those of us that have been reading your posts....
Reply
-
-
100%
1-2-Oscar1 year, 7 months ago
"Even CNN, which leads all other outlets in credibility, doesn't command the level of trust it did a decade ago. Its credibility ratings have been slipping steadily since 1993 (the channel was launched in 1981). In 1998, 42% of all those surveyed said they "believed all or most" of what they saw on CNN, the primary metric Pew has used to measure credibility. In 2006, the figure was 28%."
When barely a quarter of the people believe that thay are an accurate news source, CNN has very little to brag about. The graphs used to illustrate the article are not necessarily fully interpreted in the text, because the author simply includes them to show CNN ahead of FOX and MSNBC, but anyone looking at them can see the trends established over the past few years. CNN's credibility has been steadily declining, and FOX has been slowly climbing, so that it is apparent that FOX will soon pass CNN as"tha most trusted news source."
Reply-
0%
1-2-Oscar1 year, 7 months ago
That is not something I would like to see, and it should be enough to set off alarm bells at CNN headquarters. Their credibility is eroding--what will they do about it?
Reply -
0%
1-2-Oscar1 year, 7 months ago
"The Idiot factor" is not something I deal with regularly. I will therefore leave it to those who encounter it daily, perhaps while shaving.
Reply -
-
71%
IcCaRus1 year, 7 months ago
saying Faux News is the "most trusted" is like saying Pravda was the "most trusted"....
of course Fox is trusted by those who wish to hear its lies and support of a terrible president and his failed policies. just like Pravda was "trusted" by the communist faithful in the Soviet Union.
also, when discussing the merits of Faux News we must never forget THEY are the network that actually sued for the right ti lie.
Reply
-
-
-
100%
1-2-Oscar1 year, 7 months ago
There is "no way in hell" I would ask you to.
My comment addressed observable trends, not personal preference. News channel ratings have little to do with veracity, and much to do with controversy. CNN, with personalities like Nancy Grace and Glenn Beck, has chosen the low road, hoping that becoming more offensive than FOX will attract more viewers. The days when you could put your trust in any news service may be past.
Reply
-
-
-
90%
1-2-Oscar1 year, 7 months ago
1. I suspect that you have no information concerning "the lies" I want hear. However, that does not deter you from painting anyone who disagrees with you on any small point with a very broad and sloppy brush.
2. At no time have I suggested that any of the news sources mentioned in the article were any more accurate than any other. The article addresses polls which reflect public opinion. I commented on observable trends. You seem displeased with my comment, so you have undertaken to attribute to me things which I did not say nor imply. Since you cannot "win" (whatever it is you are trying to win) on the facts of our posts here, you have chosen misrepresentation as your weapon of choice.
Too bad.
Reply
-
-
-
100%
david_nwpa1 year, 7 months ago
Honestly, I think some credit should also go to USA Today, the Washington Post, the New York Times, and newspapers from across the country. People looking for hard sources for news turn to print media, and for the diehards, to PBS and NPR. Both these outlets provide excellent journalism.
As for CNN, I would challenge anyone to dispute the credibility and integrity of some reporters such as Christiane Ammanpour. She is undoubtedly one of the best journalists on television. Her coverage in Iraq and Afghanistan has been amazing. Then again, I am also a big fan of Anderson Cooper, but for non-journalistic reasons.
Reply-
100%
Nowalive1 year, 7 months ago
david,
With all due respect, there is no real journalism in America, let alone in the world anymore. It is all an "American Idol" grab for ratings and circulation. Even local papers (County Press, et al) fail to truly report the facts, and throw in the personal bias of the column writer as they regurgitate the AP feed. 8 second sound bytes, trimmed reprints of previously reported stories from other sources all lend themselves to the confusion and division over every issue, real or perceived. I no longer trust any news source and I have taken to "averaging" out the reporting of stories from several sources.
Reply-
100%
david_nwpa1 year, 7 months ago
Nowalive,
I understand and respect your sentiment. Some days, I too wonder what is real and what the AP is making up to soothe a given constituency. However, I truly believe that news reporting and journalism does exist and flourish in other countries and to some degree here in the US. You may have to search diligently and decipher stories, but many reporters do their best to avoid inserting too much a slant. Incidentally, if you do not "trust any news source," do you consider yourself an informed individual? If so, what criteria do you use to call yourself informed?
Reply
-
-
-
100%
mr-sir1 year, 7 months ago
While some here are trying to use this survey as an excuse to critisize each other, it's interesting to see that all 3 channels have similar results, between about 25 and 29 percent. If one channel had around 60% or higher, then THAT would be worth pointing out the difference. This seems to me that ALL 3 are the big loosers. For one channel (or it's fans/viewers) to point fingers at another channel and say "nah nah nah! We're better than you!" is laughable. Seems like they all have some work to do.
Reply -
100%
Murambatsvina1 year, 7 months ago
As far as I am concerned much of the stuff out of CNN is garbage with the minority of it's news going to the recycling bin.(That must account for the 29%). As with Fox, back up the truck, throw everything in & bury it deep underground. The pollsters got this one wrong. Should be 0%.
Reply -
100%
betruthful1 year, 7 months ago
Fox news is simply a propaganda wing of the far right- Fox is the only outlet that gets the " daily talking points" from the white house. Fox and news is an oxymoron. If anyone has heard the comments by Murdock or Fox's head of news the above comments are self explaining.
Reply -
0%
MikeReardon1 year, 7 months ago
All Cable Channels present corporate and political spin masters as experts. All Cable News Channels are too close to the spin they feed us. You know Bush and Cheney and the old Clinton and new Clinton, even Macain have all cultivated leaks that attack their oppositions positions. They each have 15 cable media contacts or newspaper contacts they regularly leak information and spin to. How many facts we all site here and defend as truths, were realy fed spins that media types pushed onto the table as the truth.
Reply -
100%
Amazing11 year, 7 months ago
Whenever I lived overseas, I was astonished by the quality and content of the news as compared to what we get here in the US. Our news is so focused on our own nation that we end up with a populace that knows almost nothing about the rest of the world. As far as I can tell, it is the entire media here that is guilty of this omission of the global picture. More dumbing down of the populace.
Reply -
56%
doppich1 year, 7 months ago
In an earlier time, the networks treated their news divisions more as public service and corporate management did not micromanage them. With the advent of the 24 hour news channels, the ability to attract viewers and advertisers and make a profit is necessary to stay in operation. Even the networks are treating news divisions as profit centers, cutting staff, uncritically passing press releases as "news" and giving us other pablum. I am amazed that all "news" programs report on "American Idol." I don't see any of them getting above their present low level of trust.
Reply -
0%
imiekie11 year, 7 months ago
Imagine our own news can't muster more then 30% trust much like our President, maybe that's the real news. As far as I'm concerned I can see the good in the world and people every day, in my little nitch it's all I see. Shame that RR needs someone to show him. Like it or not we need bad news it tells us what's really going on. How the hell are we going to right wrongs when we don't see any?? There's alot of bad everywhere hence the bad news. With a little slick promotion it's a real big seller why?? because we need it.
Reply -
100%
THOMNH621 year, 7 months ago
oh yeah right the Clinton news network is where I go for the real stuff, Larry, Wolf all non bias, yeah right.
Reply -
88%
braveone1 year, 7 months ago
hard to argue with the facts,
whoops, forgot who we're dealing with here,
but a definite trend in that graph,
you can only sling so much bull,
till it starts to stink up the place.
Reply -
-
0%
kctrixter1 year, 7 months ago
"Maybe people Distrust them all to just about the same extent."
That's pretty much were I'm at. I listen to NPR on my work commute, other than that I catch whatever news is on after whatever TV show I'm watching. I don't listen to editorials (that's what I come here for). the rest I just get off the web.
Reply
-
Add a Comment
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.