Poll: Distrust of Media Sets Record

Kevin Robillard, Politico, September 21, 2012

Three-fifths of Americans distrust the mass media—an all-time high, according to a poll released Thursday.

Sixty percent of Americans have little or no faith in the media to report the news accurately and fairly, according to a Gallup Poll, and 40 percent trust them a fair amount or a great deal. The percentage of Americans who distrust the media has been steadily rising since 2006, when 50 percent still trusted the press. In 2011, 55 percent of Americans were distrustful and 44 percent trusted the media.

There’s a sharp partisan divide as well: 58 percent of Democrats trust the press, compared with 26 percent of Republicans and 31 percent of independents.

Republicans typically see a sharp drop in media trust in election years. In 2008, their trust fell to 27 percent before rebounding over the past three years. {snip}


Topics: ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • Screamin_Ruffed_Grouse

    Of course more Democrats than Republicans trust the media. More of it says what they want to hear. That’s what people trust in news: that which fits in with their predetermined opinion/worldview. The vast bulk of those same Republicans doubtless trust Fox News a hell of a lot more. I mean, c’mon, don’t you know they’re fair & balanced?

    • Screamin_Ruffed_Grouse

      As for election years, if people had any brains in their heads, the percentage of anyone who believed a single word of any press outlet would be 0.0%

    • JohnEngelman

      People frequently refer to a court case that Fox won, which essentially gives the media the right to lie. This came from an appellate court decision that states that the FCC’s news distortion policy does not qualify as a rule, law, or regulation.http://foxnewsboycott.com/resources/fox-can-lie-lawsuit/         
      When a responsible news media, like The Washington Post, or The New York Times, makes a mistake it publishes a retraction. Only FOX News felt the need to go to court to win a lawsuit protecting what seems to be a company policy to lie. 

      • anarchyst

        You’re joking . . . right?   Responsible news media?? Your typical liberal roots are showing . . . retractions are usually in out-of the way sections and not on the same page of the original article.

        The new york times has NEVER retracted their support for the soviet union or its crack reporters, walter duranty and others for their praise of the forced collectivization of the Ukraine (Holodomor holocaust). 
        I don’t know what you’ve been smoking, but it must be some really good stuff. 
        There are many other instances of lies and fabrications.
        It is time to license “journalists” (those who sell media for profit) and loosen up the ability to sue for libel and defamation. 
        Retractions should be printed on the same page as the original article. 
        A “right of reply” statute should be enacted that requires space and time given to those who are written about . . . for a rebuttal or statement.
        No, this does not fly in the face of the First Amendment–by your own “standards” of “responsible” journalism, those who publish should be able to “put their money where their mouths are”.
        As to your criticism of Fox News, at least they present more than one point of view and regularly host those who openly criticize their somewhat conservative stance, unlike (P)MSNBC, CNN, NPR and others. 
        Best regards,

        • JohnEngelman

          When did The New York Times support the Soviet Union? How did it support the Soviet Union? There is a difference between a lie and an analysis.
          If I say that no one was executed as a result of the purge trials during the 1930s, that is a lie, unless I genuinely believe that. If I say that the purge trials unified the Soviet Union and enabled it to survive the German invasion, that is an analysis – although I doubt seriously that The New York Times ever made that claim.
          During the Second World War the Soviet Union lost an estimated twenty eight million dead, and one third of its industrial and farm plant. Those are estimates, but most analysts will agree with me. 
          A country that was so devastated was not in a position to begin an aggressive war of world conquest, but that is what Winston Churchill claimed in his “Iron Curtain” speech, and what President Truman assumed in his Truman Doctrine. 
          The New York Times probably argued during the Cold War in editorials that the United States overestimated the danger of Communism. Those arguments were not lies but analyses that I agree with. 

          • anarchyst

            New York Times journalist walter duranty expressed his admiration for the soviet union, proclaiming that it would only be a matter of time before the whole world (and yes, the United States) would look upon the soviet union as a “model” society.  He (and others in the NYT organization turned a blind eye to the horrors of soviet communism. . .Take the blinders off, Mr. Engleman . . . the “purge trials,  the subsequent Holodomor holocaust and the supplying of the gulag “death sentences” on hundreds of million make the so-called jewish “holocaust ™” look like a relatively minor event in world history.
            As far as I am concerned, we were on the “wrong side” in WW2.  If we had stayed out of WW2 and encouraged Germany to roll into the soviet union, we would have crushed communism and saved eastern Europe from the cold war . . .
            As always, best regards

          • JohnEngelman

            If we had stayed out of the Second World War the Axis powers would have almost certainly won. Another six million Jews would have been killed.
            The Slavic peoples would have been treated so harshly that they would have died out and been replaced with German settlers. The Japanese would have done the same thing with the Chinese. 
            I am glad we prevented that. 

  • JackKrak

    Only 58% of Dems trust the press???? What POSSIBLE reason would any Democrat have for suspecting that any “journalist”, talking head on tv or anyone else involved in the “news” would put anything less than a full-on leftist tilt on everything?

    Lefties & media bias is like a fish saying “Water? What water?”

    • IstvanIN

       A lot of Dems are white.  They may like what they are hearing but do they believe it? 

  • I have honestly learned more about real life from Amren and Stormfront than from any other “news” sites on Earth. More reporting goes on here than at ABC CBS NBC CNN blah blah ad infinitum

    • The__Bobster

      Stormfart is White Nationalist Lite. I could never stand the censorshop there.

      • IstvanIN

         Good golly what do you want? 

      • RisingReich

         There’s a heck of a lot more room to wiggle over there than on here, that’s for sure.

    • I always thought Stormfront was an ADL front.

  • bluffcreek1967

    The Media can’t ever be trusted when it comes to objectively or fairly reporting the news. Their intellectual and journalistic starting point is always a leftist one. It’s so blatant now that they don’t even try to conceal it! But this isn’t a recent thing. The Media has been this way for many decades now. As much as people respect Walter Cronkite, he was an old leftist fool!

    • The__Bobster

      Hell, the MSM don’t even know they’re leftist. They think NPR is fair and balanced.

  • Bon, From the Land of Babble

    The media has been left leaning for decades,  and for years White Americans had no other choice of news except what was fed to us by the likes of the anti-White CBS, NBC and ABC –what’s changed is the rise of the Internet and the availability of unfiltered news.  

    Now we know how much we have been LIED TO — as in the 1965 immigration flood bill which was shoved down our throats while the media and subversive pols assured the American public that nothing would change, DIEverisity was a “strength,” and multiculturalism was desirable.

    This is why we’ve got to reject the White-hating msm and be ever vigilant of government controls on the Internet.  It was Joe Lieberman who longingly whined:  

    “China can shut down the Internet, why can’t we?”

    Look at this chart!!  Apparently a lot of White readers also are sick and tired of the lefty press.


    As for the NY Times…

    May they all go down in flames, they deserve nothing less for the untold damage they’ve caused to White American culture.

    • The__Bobster

      As for the NY Times…

      May they all go down in flames, they deserve nothing less for the untold damage they’ve caused to White American culture.

      But John Chinaman would be in mourning for a month.

  • anarchyst

    I would p!ss on walter cronkite’s grave . . . he took an AMERICAN military victory (the Vietnam TET offensive) and turned it into a media-inspired U S “defeat”… North Vietnames general Giap said as much.  He credited the US media for giving the North the resolve to continue on.  The North was ready to “deal” until our news media snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.  walter cronkite is in the same league as walter duranty and the new york times that PRAISED the soviets for the Holodomor holocaust (forced collectivation of farms in the Ukraine).
    Moderator: please don’t delete this . . . make whatever changes you need to . . . I purposely did not capitalize their (proper) names . . . thanks.

  • JohnEngelman

    A number of years ago I read an article in The New York Times that said that liberals and conservatives are equally complicit in seeking confirmation of what they already believe, and that both tend to avoid exposure to view points they do not already have. It said that liberals do not want to be told bad things about blacks and homosexuals.
    In 1998 Matthew Shepard was killed by two men he picked up in a bar. For months this event was in the news. There was an effort to implicate the religious right. This failed, because neither of the killers attended any church, much less one affiliated with the religious right. 
    While this was happening two men raped and tortured to death a fourteen year old boy. I only learned of that several years later. I read about it once. I doubt that there was any conspiracy. The various news organs decided on their own not to cover the event. They thought it would be divisive, that it might lead to violence against homosexuals, and so on. 
    The possibility that covering the killing of Matthew Shepard might lead to violence against Christian conservatives did not occur to them.
    My local newspaper refuses to print the race of criminal suspects. This is fairly common.
    Nevertheless, there is a difference between not reporting something, and lying about it. 
    I enjoy investigating different points of view. For me press bias is not an issue, but press honesty is. The best way to learn what is really going on is to get one’s news from various sources.       

  • JohnEngelman

    According to Real Clear Politics, of the seven most recent polls Rasmussen had a tie, and President Obama is ahead in the others. The President is even ahead in FOX News.
    Real Clear Politics also has President Obama comfortably ahead in the Electoral College.

  • Goetz von Berlichingen

    Correct; Shepard was badly beaten and then raped during a high school trip to Morocco, and his drug problem came about because of that incident.