Half of Americans think the news media intends to mislead them, survey says

Originally published at: Half of Americans think the news media intends to mislead them, survey says | Boing Boing


Half of Americans not only don’t trust the news media but think it actually intends to mislead them,

and we can be lamentably sure that that half isn’t the same as the fox"news" audience…? (which we may be largely correct in assuming is in fact their mission being to mislead)


They’re not always wrong


This is the point that’s missed by the poll respondents, most of whom are no doubt right-wingers who see a monolithic “librul media” as a cabal of coastal elite evil-doers rubbing their hands together as they corrupt a great white God-fearing nation.

The reality as demonstrated by the NYT coverage of trans issues is more pernicious: a culture of willfully purblind editors who believe they’re impartially giving “both sides” a platform to express their concern because they haven’t yet accepted that one of the sides is completely discredited. See also their infamous "Nazi next door " pieces, Judith Miller’s coverage of the Cheney Regency’s lies about Iraq, etc.

That’s how how media outlets like the NYT actively mislead their audiences, by lending their credibility – legitimately earned in other areas – to fascists and TERDs and others like them.


All news outlets have editorial bias of one form or another, so this is a pretty healthy opinion to have.
We’re lucky in the UK to have ITN and the Beeb, which are better than most.
But even there, they’re often blind to their own failings.


I mean, is Fox a “national news organization”? OAN? Newsmax? In which case, yes, “national news organizations” absolutely intend to mislead. Demonstrably so.


Granted, the people who choose those outlets arguably WANT to be misled…


I think people confuse or think the editorial shows are news.

When CNN or even Fox is just reporting a news story I believe they are giving us the news.

It’s when they give their opinion on the news, that’s when they are misleading or interpreting it for the viewer to convince them of their viewpoint.

Unless it’s a breaking story like a shooting or war reporting, in my opinion, anything on cable news after 7pm and before 10am is absolutely more opinion than news.


This is a terrible polling question without follow up. Just like the perpetual “Do you think the country is headed in the right direction” has zero worth without context. Lots of people are going to respond “no”, but some are referring to kids being able to freely express their identity while the rest are referring to an actual fascists takeover.


No. Each and every outlet has its inherent biases in editorial policy for news coverage. Faux, however, was purpose designed by a former Nixon operative and funded by a fascist-adjacent billionaire as an all-out right-wing propaganda organ. That makes every bit of its reportage suspect in a way that’s different from analyses of the NYT’s or CNN’s news coverage.


Fox? You sweet summer child


Fox has several multi billion dollar law suits against it that aren’t going well for them for reporting falsehoods as facts. That they knew were falsehoods according to their own testimony.


Assuming good faith, there is still a bias in what gets reported, even before we get to how.


I wonder what percentage of Americans think survey and polling companies intentionally mislead them? I bet they didn’t ask that question in the survey.


If they mean Fox and Newmax then perhaps there is truth to it but I suspect it is the other way around.


I sometimes think I should do more surveys (current count is functionally none) to balance the “old person with nothing better to do” nature of most respondents with a bit of “not quite as old person with nothing better to do”. But then I remember that the questions are often leading, responses taken out of context, and results twisted to fit specific narratives if it gets reported on. At which point I find something more useful to do like stare at the wall.


Well, every paper has a proprietor with an agenda. So these people are right. But almost certainly not for the reasons they think.

As @Mungrul said

But it’s not…

… if you have it for the wrong reasons (e.g. ‘damn librul meeja’)


Well, if various polls were reliable when they reported that 38% of voters believed pretty much anything Trump said, this isn’t all that surprising.

On the other hand, polling questions are blunt instruments. I pretty much fit the “old person with nothing better to do” description, and I either refuse to participate or find myself terminating a polling session when my honest answer to most of the questions is “It depends,” and explaining why would require several hundred words of explanation and background. It usually doesn’t take long to work out what the poller’s client is fishing for, at which point I apologize to the questioner (who is following a strict script) and say goodbye.



Wait, you are serious.

BBC News is TER central. I and other trans people can not appear on any BBC current affairs program without being opposed by someone who hates us. If that same person who hates us is invited onto another BBC current affairs program, no trans person is required to be invited to oppose them. We are also forbidden from talking about any issue other than trans issues, which means any trans person who is an expert in their field can not appear on BBC news to talk about it.

Imagine if a BBC news story about VLSI couldn’t feature Lynn Conway. Does that sound ridiculous? That’s the situation right now.

My existence is considered to be political bias by BBC News. That is a very dangerous position to be in.


As someone who believes there is such a thing as real journalism whose goal is to find out the truth, and who tries to convince people of this frequently, I’m shocked this number is so low. In my experience, almost no one believes the news media tells the truth. So I take this article as good news.