AJR  Features
From AJR,   March 2001

Positive Reviews   

An AJR/Ford Foundation poll finds readers are not as downbeat about their local newspapers as they're often believed to be.
Funding for this poll and article was provided by the Ford Foundation as part of its program initiative "Fair Play: Building Trust and Credibility in the News Media."

By Carl Sessions Stepp

Carl Sessions Stepp (cstepp@umd.edu) began writing for his hometown paper, the Marlboro Herald-Advocate in Bennettsville, South Carolina, in 1963, after his freshman year in high school. He studied journalism at the University of South Carolina, where he edited The Gamecock.

After college, he worked for the St. Petersburg Times and the Charlotte Observer before becoming the first national editor at USA Today in 1982. In 1983, he joined the University of Maryland journalism faculty full time.

In the ensuing 30 years, he also has served as senior editor and book reviewer for AJR, writing dozens of pieces. He has been a visiting writing and editing coach for news organizations in more than 30 states.

     



BRIDGETTE ROBINSON IS just what the newspaper world is praying for. She is a young, female member of a minority group. She has just begun reading newspapers regularly. And she likes what she sees.
In marketing terms, Robinson is a three-fer: a member of three groups (minorities, women and people under 30) in which papers need to win new readers. In real life, of course, she is much more than numbers. She is a 21-year-old black woman, a receptionist at a New Orleans hair salon, a college student studying English and a citizen increasingly interested in her community.
She began reading newspapers seriously about two years ago. She turned to the classified ads while apartment hunting, noticed other interesting items and became a regular.
Like many people in an AJR-sponsored national poll released this month, Robinson finds herself warming toward her local daily paper and appreciating its efforts to improve.
"I read it every day," she says simply. "It's getting better and better."
Overall, the AJR survey found that newspapers seem to be rising in readers' esteem, a trend that stood out among young people and members of minority groups such as Robinson. Among 1,174 people sampled, 77 percent read a newspaper at least once a week, 65 percent considered all or most of what they read to be believable and 31 percent felt their local papers were becoming more accurate compared with 10 percent who said the opposite.
In news that reporters and editors will especially welcome, people 18 to 29 and those who identified themselves as nonwhite rated newspapers higher on improving believability and accuracy than the general public did.
But the survey produced sobering results for newspapers as well.
Despite converts like Bridgette Robinson, the survey found that young people, nonwhite people and women were less likely to be everyday readers. While 69 percent of the respondents over 59 read a paper every day, the figure for those 18 to 29 was 16 percent and for nonwhites 29 percent. Forty-four percent of men read every day, compared with 40 percent of women. Young people and nonwhites were more likely than other groups to say that journalists are "not too knowledgeable" about their communities.
In addition, 69 percent of all those surveyed said papers need to do a better job of explaining themselves, and 64 percent said news stories were "very biased" or "somewhat biased."
"I've had a little experience with some people who produce the newspaper," says Scott Miller, 38, a Honda team leader in Ostrander, Ohio, "and I feel they are not above creating or embellishing a story. I tend to believe it is getting worse."
The survey asked people about a range of issues, including how often they read a local newspaper, whether papers are becoming more accurate or less accurate, whether they are becoming more believable or less believable, whether they are biased, whether journalists are knowledgeable about their communities, whether papers are useful, whether certain topics receive too much or too little coverage, and how people are responding to papers' attempts to explain themselves and their news practices.
After analyzing the results and conducting follow-up interviews with some of the people polled, several themes emerge:

1. PEOPLE IN GENERAL seem well-disposed, even affectionate toward their local newspapers.
In the survey, people were asked to base their answers on the local paper they read most often. Relatively few respondents chose the most extreme or negative answers. For example, on the matter of how much they believe the information in news stories, 8 percent said they believe it all, compared with 1 percent who said none; 57 percent said most, compared with 5 percent who said a little.
In interviews, survey participants often expressed a fondness for what they repeatedly referred to as their paper.
"Our town is small, and our paper is small, and it does a good job," says Madeline Cluck, 76, of Sentinel, Oklahoma, adding that the paper had a new young editor and was getting better and better.
Even the critics often worded their complaints in an understanding way. Carlos Atchison, 22, of Clanton, Alabama, mentioned that his paper had made errors in a recent story in which he knew someone who was involved. But then he added charitably, "Reporters do a good job. They just have to find different ways of getting the story right, because folks want to know the whole story."

2. PEOPLE GIVE NEWSPAPERS credit for making improvements but remain moderately skeptical about their performance.
For example, 31 percent said their papers are more accurate today than over the past few years, compared with 10 percent who said less accurate. About the same percentage of people said papers are less believable today (12 percent) than said they are more believable (11 percent).
Many people seem to be noticing efforts by papers to expand local coverage. "It seems like they are putting more articles in about what happens out here in the different little communities," says Maxine Kennedy, 63, a school lunch aide in Corunna, Michigan. "It's not just the city news, but it's news from the smaller places as well."
Nancy Root, 44, a state transportation department supervisor in Belmont, New York, sees competition driving papers to improve. "I think they are getting better, and I think one reason is that they have to be more competitive with the Web and television and all that," Root says. "I think papers are for the most part constantly evolving. If they don't, they won't stay in business very long."
Skeptics point to inconsistencies and inaccuracies in coverage. Douglas James II, 27, a restaurant worker in Plainfield, New Jersey, finds too much concentration on what he calls "your more prominent towns," at the expense of news from less wealthy areas. Bridgette Robinson agrees, adding, "In some ways it is kind of slanted.... In other cases it's just mistakes."

3. THERE IS MODEST GOOD news for papers that have been campaigning to raise credibility and connection to readers.
Ten percent said they had noticed stories in which papers discussed or explained their news practices, and 20 percent thought the number of such stories was increasing. But 69 percent wanted papers to "do a better job" of explaining themselves.
In interviews, even people who told pollsters they had noticed such stories had trouble recalling specifics. Still, they liked the idea.
Root expresses a sentiment shared by many. "I think it is a good thing," she says of newspapers' explaining themselves more. "I don't pay a lot of attention to it, but I do notice it, and I just think it's nice that there is at least that much openness out there."
Michelle Young, 50, an Arizona teacher, was one reader who did remember a specific explanatory story. "It helped," she says. "I had wondered why they were doing certain things, and they explained. I didn't agree with what they were doing, but I was glad to have the information."

4. DIFFERENCES BETWEEN GROUPS looked mild--except for the surprisingly positive spin from young people and nonwhite readers.
Young people tended to be more complimentary toward newspapers than the average respondents. For example, 13 percent of those 18 to 29 found newspaper reporting more believable than in past years, compared with 11 percent of the overall population; only 6 percent of the young people found it less believable, compared with 12 percent of the general audience. Young people were more likely than any other age group to say reporting is becoming more accurate and far less likely to say it is becoming less accurate.
"I like reading the newspaper. I believe what's in there," says Brian Shaw, 19, a freshman civil-engineering major at the University of Colorado. Shaw grew up in Maine, in a newspaper-reading family. Like many young people, he began with the comics, then graduated into the full paper. When he moved across the country to college this past fall, he made a point of reading the local daily.
Carlos Atchison says he stopped reading newspapers for a while but recently resumed because he thinks they are improving. "A couple of years ago, when stuff happened and news reporters tried to report on it, there was a different meaning. If one thing happened, they made it sound like another thing happened," Atchison explains. "Now it seems like they are getting better at it. I've started back because they have gotten more accurate about things."
Among members of minority groups, 16 percent found reporting to be more believable today, compared with 11 percent in the overall sample. Only 5 percent rated it less believable, compared with 12 percent overall. Forty-three percent believed accuracy is improving, compared with 31 percent of the full sample.
Bridgette Robinson knows that many of her contemporaries don't read newspapers. "Basically, most of them say it is depressing," Robinson says. "But I believe it is there for the community, for us to read. It might have important information that you need. You never know."
Atchison likes news, whether print or broadcast. "I got a lot of partners my age and the news comes on and they say, ŒMan, turn that off,' " he says. "But I tell them, ŒYou can learn stuff.' I learn something every day in the news."
Here are more details of the poll.
The telephone survey of 1,174 people was conducted in August by the Center for Survey Research and Analysis at the University of Connecticut. Kenneth Dautrich, director of the center, oversaw the project. Sampling error for the full sample is plus or minus three percentage points at the 95 percent confidence level. For subgroups, the sampling error is higher.

ACCURACY
Asked whether their local paper was more accurate, less accurate or about the same compared with the past few years, 31 percent answered more accurate, 10 percent less accurate, and 51 percent no change. Women, nonwhites and those 18 to 29 were more likely to say more accurate. Older readers were slightly more likely to say less accurate.
In interviews, several readers who had had direct contact with journalists raised questions about accuracy.
Michelle Young, the special-education teacher living in the Phoenix area, remembers being interviewed for a story. "I work in a school district where we are quoted a lot, and invariably they get it wrong," she says. "I was not misquoted. They just took it out of context."
"I used to work in a motel in a big town and we had a couple of things go on there," says Scott Miller of Ohio. "When it came out in the paper it was not a thing like what actually happened. They shouldn't do that. This isn't fiction."

BELIEVABILITY
The survey asked two questions about believability: how much people believe their local newspaper's stories and whether they think its reporting is becoming more or less believable.
On the first issue, 8 percent said they believed all they read, 57 percent most, 28 percent some, 5 percent a little, and 1 percent none. Young people were much more likely to say all (18 percent) and nonwhites somewhat more likely (12 percent). People 60 and up were more likely to say a little (8 percent). Those who read a newspaper less than once a week were twice as likely to answer a little (11 percent) or none (3 percent).
On the second issue, 11 percent said reporting has become more believable, 12 percent less believable, and 70 percent about the same. Again, young people (13 percent) and nonwhite people (16 percent) were more likely to say more believable. Males (15 percent) and those over 59 (16 percent) were more likely to say less believable.
"I find some fact, and I also find some fiction," says Curtis Thornton, 71, a retired railroad track layout designer from Saginaw, Michigan. "But this is normal."

BIAS
The poll drew tough answers across the board on the matter of "how biased toward one viewpoint is the information in news stories." Overall, 15 percent said very biased, 49 percent somewhat biased, 19 percent not very biased, and 11 percent not at all biased.
On this question too, young people were somewhat more generous; fewer said very biased (9 percent) and more said not very (25 percent) or not at all (13 percent).
Out of the total sample, 64 percent thought the news was either very or somewhat biased.
The comparable figures seemed high across various groups: 65 percent for whites, 62 percent for nonwhites, 65 percent for males, 64 percent for females, 59 percent for people 18 to 29, 66 percent for those 30 to 59, and 66 percent for those over 59.
Scott Miller, the Ohio car builder, links journalism to society at large. "I just believe that people in general are probably getting a little less truthful and upright," he says. "I could be totally wrong, but it seems they may be more willing to slant their story to make people believe their point of view."
Douglas James, the New Jersey restaurant employee who says he found a bias toward wealthier towns, was asked why this might occur. "It's a matter of politics, I would think," James says.

KNOWLEDGE
Respondents were asked to rate how knowledgeable local reporters and editors are about "what is happening in your community." Of the total sample, 34 percent said very, 51 percent somewhat, 9 percent not too knowledgeable, and 4 percent not at all.
On this question, unlike many of the others, young people and nonwhite people tended to be more critical than the average respondent. Among 18- to 29-year-olds, 14 percent said not too knowledgeable and 6 percent not at all knowledgeable. Among nonwhites, 11 percent said not too knowledgeable and 6 percent not at all. Infrequent readers were the most likely of all to answer not too knowledgeable (20 percent).
Several readers mentioned stories or issues they knew something about and pointed to distorted or incomplete articles about them. Others said papers cover news too narrowly and miss a lot. "The things going on in the community," says Doug James, "are not the things I see in the paper."

USEFULNESS
One question polled respondents on "how useful is the information in stories...for making decisions about public life and specific issues in your community." Overall, 22 percent said very useful, 60 percent somewhat useful, 10 percent not very useful and 6 percent not at all useful.
Results were fairly consistent by race, gender and age, although men were somewhat more likely (13 percent) to say not very useful. The biggest cluster of negative answers to this question came from those who read newspapers less than once a week; 18 percent of that group said not very useful and 10 percent not at all useful.

STORIES ABOUT VARIOUS TOPICS
The survey also asked about three "areas of news and editorial coverage": racial incidents and issues, religious interests, and ethnic lifestyles and interests. Those people responding were asked whether there was too much, too little or about the right amount of coverage.
In each case, a majority of respondents, 55 or 56 percent, answered about the right amount.
For racial incidents and issues, 20 percent replied too much and 20 percent too little. Nonwhite respondents were much more likely to answer too little coverage (35 percent). Young readers and less-frequent readers were also more likely than average readers to answer too little.
For religious interests, 10 percent said there was too much coverage and 27 percent too little. Again, young people and nonwhite people were more likely to say too little.
For ethnic lifestyles and interests, 12 percent said too much coverage and 25 percent too little. Here, differences were not as noticeable among the subgroups, except for nonwhite respondents, who were much more likely to answer too little (38 percent).

HOW NEWSPAPERS EXPLAIN THEMSELVES
Three questions were asked about newspaper stories that explain how journalists make decisions about news coverage.
First, respondents were asked whether they had noticed any stories in their local newspaper about its news practices. Overall, 10 percent said yes and 85 percent said no. A follow-up asked how many such stories they had noticed, and the most common answers were one or two. The pattern of answers was consistent across the subcategories, except that those who read less frequently were less likely to have noticed this kind of coverage.
The survey also inquired whether people felt the number of stories explaining journalism practices has increased, decreased or stayed the same in recent years. Twenty percent said increased, 8 percent decreased and 60 percent the same, a pattern in evidence across the board.
Finally, the poll asked whether the local paper provides "enough background" on its news decisions. Here the results were dramatic throughout. Overall, 24 percent said the paper provided enough background, but 69 percent said it "should do a better job." In every subcategory, at least 60 percent called for an improved performance. Older people were somewhat less likely to give this answer, and males, people aged 30 to 59 and nonwhite respondents were more likely to call for better explanation.
In interviews, respondents tended to favor more explanation but in tempered, not impassioned, tones.
"It is important for people to know how newspapers are conducted, how they are written and what they are trying to achieve," says Curtis Thornton, the retired railroad designer from Michigan. "One thing that is important to this nation is having newspapers where you can read the facts."

###