- The Washington Times - Thursday, September 30, 2004

The traditional media in this country is in tune with the elite, not the people.

Rupert Murdoch, chairman, the News Corp., in the Wall Street Journal, Sept. 26.

That sums up public perception of the definers and disseminators of what is called “news” in this country. The media perform mostly for themselves and their elite friends, not the people they presume to serve. This attitude is responsible for the loss of viewers and readers. The media appear willing to go down with the ship, rather than let someone throw them a lifeline.

The lack of trust has moved beyond fringe groups to the mainstream. According to two recent polls — one by the Gallup organization and the other by Rasmussen — the public perception of the media’s credibility has declined to where a substantial and growing number of people see the major newspapers and networks as biased in favor of John Kerry.

The Gallup poll, conducted after the CBS “60 Minutes” piece on George Bush’s Texas National Guard records, but before the network apologized for using fraudulent documents, concluded “just 44 percent of Americans express confidence in the media’s ability to report news stories accurately and fairly.”

That marks a “significant drop” from 54 percent expressing confidence only a year ago. The poll also found 48 percent of Americans view the news media as “too liberal,” while 15 percent view them as “too conservative.”

The Rasmussen poll says many more viewers regard the three major broadcast networks and CNN as biased in favor of Mr. Kerry, with CBS “seen as the most biased — 37 percent believe that network news team is trying to help the Kerry campaign” — compared to only 10 percent who believe CBS is trying to aid the president.

Rasmussen also found big newspapers — the New York Times, USA Today, The Washington Post — suffer from a perception they favor Mr. Kerry, with the Times leading the pack, with 35 percent of respondents saying they think it’s biased.

It will surprise a lot of people — it surprised me — that, according to Gallup, “those with lower levels of education and income are more likely to have confidence in the media’s accuracy and fairness.” Most media people believe it is the uneducated who trust them the least. You know, those “ignoramuses” who rely on talk radio to tell them what to think.

Journalism is the only profession of which I am aware that ignores public attitudes. How long could a restaurant stay in business if it had bad food, dirty restrooms, high prices and lousy service, especially if a competitor opened across the street with everything the other place doesn’t have?

Competition promotes media and information diversity as never before. Cable, especially Fox News Channel (for which I toil and which is regarded in the two polls, along with the Wall Street Journal, as biased toward Mr. Bush), has begun to even the playing field. Internet blogs are now major information players.

The big networks and establishment newspapers no longer are the news gatekeepers. The journalistic equivalent of the Berlin Wall has fallen, and millions are enjoying a new birth of informational freedom they had not previously known. This may not be good for the elite press, but it is great for the people, who feel empowered beyond letters to the editor.

In his Sept. 26 column in The Washington Post, David Broder writes, “The professional practices and code of responsibility in journalism have suffered a body blow.” Mr. Broder says one reason for the decline in trust is big media’s “offering their most prestigious and visible jobs not to people deeply imbued with the culture and values of newsrooms, but to stars imported from the political world.”

He is partially right, but that’s not the main reason. Journalists seem to write only for those who agree with them. Many treat with contempt the values and beliefs held by millions of Americans. They promote every lifestyle and behavior choice that differs from the experience of the overwhelming majority as something new, trendy and worthy of admiration, if not emulation. Anyone who protests is labeled a bigot.

Prior to cable and the Internet, viewers and readers had to take it, even if they didn’t like it. Now they don’t have to take it. Instead of lamenting the loss of readers and viewers, the big media should pay attention to a country not comprised of elites, but of real people with legitimate concerns. When they do, they’ll win them back. If they don’t, they won’t.

Cal Thomas is a nationally syndicated columnist.

Copyright © 2019 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

The Washington Times Comment Policy

The Washington Times welcomes your comments on Spot.im, our third-party provider. Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.


Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide