Restoring Trust In The Press

We  would like to think that our role as journalists aligns with those of our readers. Our core goals seem so fundamental to an informed electorate in a representative democracy. How could anyone disagree with our mission? People do and for what they believe are good reasons.
Most journalists hold these fundamental beliefs:
- We should give voice to the powerless, who face with few resources the daunting power wielded by government and industry:
 - We must hold those in power accountable for their actions and inactions that have a negative impact on our lives.
- We need to discover the facts to reveal the truth.
- We can only get those facts when government is transparent.
- It is only by revealing what is wrong with our society that we can take the steps needed to fix things.
The problem with assumptions is that they are often based on what we want to believe rather than others’ beliefs.
Now a study published by the Media Insight Project, a joint venture of the American Press Institute and The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research, reveals our perspective doesn’t match that of our readers very well. And, if our readers are to trust us, we have to do a better job of writing our stories respecting their core values.
We all know that trust in the media is at an all-time low. We are bitterly divided into warring camps. If a news source doesn’t align perfectly with a person’s political and social beliefs, it is not simply dismissed, it is vilified.
At the local level, we are a little better off. We are more trusted. That doesn’t mean that there aren’t bitter disagreements and intolerance when it comes to the opinion page. In our four decades of publishing a community newspaper, we’ve never seen a time of such animosity for those who aren’t part of the reader’s political tribe.
The Media Insight Project study shows that while some attitudes toward the role journalists play are tied to political beliefs, there are others held by both sides that differ from what journalists think.
“Rather than distrust toward the media being tied only to the perception of partisan bias,” the study’s authors say, “the problem at the heart of the media trust crisis may be skepticism about the underlying purpose and mission journalists are trying to fulfill.”
Of the five core values that journalists hold, only one was shared by a majority of those surveyed. Sixty-seven percent agreed that facts are needed if we are to know the truth.
Just one-third of those surveyed believe that journalists care about their challenges or that they have sound moral character. Seventy-one percent do not agree that society is better off when journalists highlight its problems.
When asked if they believe in all five core beliefs of journalists, only 11 percent said “yes.”
The study’s authors say, “The trust crisis may be better understood through people’s moral values than their politics. There is a link between people’s moral values and their support for journalism values.”
 
Morals play a significant role
One critical insight of the study was that people who put a high value on authority, a sense of tradition, and loyalty are skeptical of the journalist’s role in holding those in power accountable.
“People who most value loyalty and authority are much less likely than others to endorse the idea that there should be a watchdog over those in power,” the authors write.
It is no surprise that these respondents also respect leaders and not so much those whose work is questioning their actions or behaviors. “They worry that some of the things journalists believe in can be intrusive and get in the way of officials doing their jobs,” the study’s authors write. “This group would like to see more stories about what works, not just what is going wrong.”
Those who favored respect for authority and loyalty to leaders preferred writing that stressed service to the community.
While journalists seek transparency, those who respect authority believe there are times when public leaders can’t tell citizens everything. Information has to be kept secret to get things done.
“Interestingly, this group is evenly split between political conservatives and moderates, the study says: half said they are Republicans, 30 percent said Democrats, and the remainder identified themselves as political independents,” the study says.
News consumers whose sympathies lie with the powerless in society were more responsive to news sources that committed to protecting this group.
We believe we have to dig out the facts. But our readers may think that a few facts don’t tell the whole story and can be misleading.
 
How do we build trust?
“The study indicates now that consumers are interested in news that highlights potential solutions to problems and want to hear about things that are working,” Tom Rosenstiel, executive director of the American Press Institute, said. “We tend to think that stories that celebrate the good things in society are soft stories, kind of wimpy. But they may be more important than we think in providing a full and accurate picture of the world.”
By rephrasing the way we write, we may help restore trust in the media. Rather than write, “City officials have repeatedly failed to solve the workforce housing shortage in the community,” a journalist might write, “City leaders have been working persistently for several years to address the community’s workforce housing shortage despite significant challenges.”
The sentence now shows respect for leaders and appeals to our sense of helping others. Too often, the headlines and stories tear down rather than build up. By changing how we phrase our words, we might build trust among our readers over time.