15 Jun 09

Focus groups did not realise Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton were from the same political part

A new study suggests that the news does not represent the world in a way that the general public understands. ‘Public Trust in the News', published by the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism at Oxford University, says people surveyed did not think news stories were properly explained or researched.

Surprisingly, although the US primary elections was the biggest international news story in March 2008, not one member of the study’s Leeds-based focus groups realised that contenders Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton were both from the Democratic Party.

The study also included comments of journalists, claiming they were neither dismayed nor surprised by the public’s lack of understanding about the background to some headlines. Study lead author Professor Stephen Coleman, Visiting Fellow at RISJ from Leeds University, argues that this demonstrates that many journalists are ‘complacently trusting that it is enough for the general public to simply be exposed to a story’.

Another concern raised by the focus groups was that the participants viewed journalists as determining rather than reporting the news, with comments including:‘You used to get reports of what had happened, but now the media tend to create the news rather than report on it …’

Participants felt too many stories in the news were not grounded in fact, an example being the conspiracy stories run in several newspapers relating to Princess Diana’s death. A common complaint was that the media did not have authority or clarity in the way stories were presented, with a media overload on some stories creating confusion for the public.

Even journalists voiced concern about the lack of factual accuracy shown by sections of the media: ‘I think there are large parts of the media where… the news desks are so intolerant of anything short of what they’ve asked for, a reporter will give them what they want regardless of whether or not they’ve got it and that’s terrible.’ (Tabloid journalist)

However, participants spoke quite differently about local news than national or global coverage, which they regarded as remote and not easily verifiable. Local newspapers and radio were closer to their personal experience and seen to have fewer opportunities to abuse their journalistic authority.

Professor Coleman said: ‘The unifying fact is what seems to be that distance between the viewers and readers, and the news providers. There are lessons to be learnt by journalists: that they should be less complacent about their understanding of their readership or audience.’

The study recommends more journalists should engage in ‘a mission to connect’, to prevent news consumers ‘feeling like outsiders looking on at a drama’. One suggestion is for news providers to carry the back-stories behind the headlines akin to the coverage expected of sports programmes.

The media is also recommended to play more of a role as conduit between the public and government. The public’s ability to act on issues that concern them could be facilitated by journalists and media channels.

Finally, the study argues that journalists need to provide a greater variety of perspectives on news stories. The implications and interpretation of events will be coloured by the readers’ or viewers’ own background, particularly in stories relating to world events.