• Fellowships
  • Reports
  • Lab
  • Storyboard
    • Nieman Foundation at Harvard
    HOME
    About
    Subscribe
    Archives
              
    Foundation
    Reports
    Storyboard
    LATEST STORY
    BREAKING: The ways people hear about big news these days; “into a million pieces,” says source
    Business Models Mobile & Apps Audience & Social Aggregation & Discovery Reporting & Production
    ABOUT                    SUBSCRIBE
    Dec. 10, 2020, 1:30 p.m.
    Americans may answer survey questions “aspirationally,” leading to overestimates about their news consumption
    LINK: www.journalism.org  ➚   |   Posted by: Sarah Scire   |   December 10, 2020

    If you’ve seen surveys about news consumption and thought they sounded pretty bleak, I have some bad news.

    A new, yearlong analysis from the Pew Research Center indicates there is “strong evidence” self-reported numbers — low as they may seem — may be inflated.

    This is apparently especially true for Americans. The authors — Michael Barthel, Amy Mitchell, Dorene Asare-Marfo, Courtney Kennedy, and Kirsten Worden — explain:

    Many Americans say that following the news is “very important” to being a good citizen, and those who say this are more likely than others to overestimate their news consumption when their survey responses are compared with passive data tracked on their devices. This suggests that following the news is seen as a “socially desirable” behavior by many people, which may lead them to think aspirationally about their news consumption – i.e., how often they ideally intend to consume the news rather than how often they actually do – when answering survey questions about it.

    Passive data collection about digital news consumption can address this tendency to overestimate, but having participants agree to researchers tracking their online activity comes with its own challenges. Often, this type of collection misses in-app news consumption (when someone reads a news story they’ve found on Twitter or another social media app) and news consumption that happens on alternate devices (like a personal tablet or work laptop) not included in the study.

    The report also found that there was confusion over which organizations generate news and original reporting in the first place.

    Nearly a quarter of Americans (23 percent) could not correctly identify whether any of the six sources — ABC News, Wall Street Journal, HuffPost, Google News, Apple News, and Facebook — do original reporting. An additional 30 percent only answered one or two questions correctly.

    The bright side (I guess?) is that Americans seem to know what they don’t know; only 9 percent said they feel “very confident” they can identify organizations that do original reporting.

    Ultimately, the authors are interested in one big question: Moving forward, how can we improve our ability to accurately measure news consumption?

    The report found that asking general questions — “In the past year, have you paid for news?” — won’t cut it. To that query, 83 percent of Americans answered no. But when asked more specific questions, 19 percent of that group said they’d purchased a “subscription to a newspaper, magazine, or news website” in the past year and 6 percent said they’d donated to a public broadcaster or other news organization.

    The study also found that adding a specific reference period — choosing “in the past week” rather than “in a typical week” — resulted in a more accurate measurements. Similarly, asking “how many days a week?” yielded better results than asking respondents to choose from “often, sometimes, rarely, or never.”

    Some distinctions were lost on participants and adding examples of news sources helped … but only in some cases.

    One example? Participants don’t always know the difference between national network TV and cable TV news stations so including “Cable TV news, such as CNN, Fox News, or MSNBC” yielded more accurate results than merely leaving the choice as “Cable TV.” By contrast, adding examples to “daily newspapers, such as The New York Times” didn’t produce a significant improvement; people seem to be able to come up with their own examples just fine.

    You can read the full report here.

    Show tags
     
    What’s the best way to follow how the news is changing?
    Our daily email, with all the freshest future-of-journalism news.
    Prefer a once-a-week email? »
    The latest from Nieman Lab
    BREAKING: The ways people hear about big news these days; “into a million pieces,” says source
    Joshua Benton
    In 1924, a magazine ran a contest: “Who is to pay for broadcasting and how?” A century later, we’re still asking the same question
    Julia Barton
    You’re more likely to believe fake news shared by someone you barely know than by your best friend
    Joshua Benton
    To find readers for longform investigations, Public Health Watch leans on partners and in-person work
    Sarah Scire
    Could social media support healthy online conversations? New_ Public is working on it
    Sophie Culpepper
    Join the 60,000 who get the freshest future-of-journalism news in our daily email.
    BREAKING: The ways people hear about big news these days; “into a million pieces,” says source
    The New York Times and the Washington Post compete with meme accounts for the chance to be first with a big headline.
    In 1924, a magazine ran a contest: “Who is to pay for broadcasting and how?” A century later, we’re still asking the same question
    Radio Broadcast received close to a thousand entries to its contest — but ultimately rejected them all.
    You’re more likely to believe fake news shared by someone you barely know than by your best friend
    “The strength of weak ties” applies to misinformation, too.
    Help advance the Nieman Foundation’s mission “to promote and elevate the standards of journalism” by making a donation.

    To promote and elevate the standards of journalism

    Covering thought leadership in journalism

    Pushing to the future of journalism

    Exploring the art and craft of story
    © 2024 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College  /  Some rights reserved
    Harvard Trademark Privacy Digital Accessibility
    Walter Lippmann House    One Francis Ave.    Cambridge, MA 02138    617 495 2237