Kuznitz 1

Alison Kuznitz
Dr. Jessica OHara
Rhetoric and Civic Life 137H
30 November 2015
The decline of credibility in traditional mainstream media
During the 1970s, journalists were essentially glorified rock stars
in the eyes of the American public. As Bob Woodward and Carl
Bernstein famously investigated the Watergate Scandal, and CBS
Evening News Anchor Walter Cronkite raked in unparalleled trust
ratings (Ladd 7), reporters attained an air of high nobility and
credibility. However, it appears this golden age of journalism may have
vanished forever. From the late 1990s, levels of trust in traditional
mainstream media have been declining. A 2014 Gallup survey states
that only a startling four in ten Americans are confident in the medias
ability to report the news fully, accurately, and fairly (McCarthy).
This negative paradigm shift is rooted in the business model of
journalism and the medias reputation. More specifically, the advent of
alternative media sources, increased sensationalistic coverage, and
multi-chain ownership underlie the issue of the business structure. In
regards to the medias reputation, inaccurate reporting and political
polarization can be held accountable.
A faulty journalistic business model: Fragmentation

Kuznitz 2
Prior to the late 1990s, the public possessed limited options for
staying informed on current events, allowing for the trustworthiness of
mainstream media to soar. Conversely, the emergence of alternative
sources has wreaked havoc on this credibility. The phenomenon of
media fragmentation has arrived in an era in which the aforementioned
traditional news outlets are struggling to survive financially. Due to the
revamped business concept, individuals can now receive the latest
updates from the Huffington Post, BuzzFeed, or Twitter with the click of
a button. Unlike mass media, online platforms present content that is
compatible with readers ideologies. Thus, these alternative options
aim to mitigate trust issues by increasingly seek[ing] to affirm their
audiences biases instead of holding the line (Rupp). Conservatives
will read publications intended for conservatives, and liberals will tune
into stations with liberal overtones. If individuals were forced to resume
consumption of mainstream news, they would likely regard their
preferred, personally tailored sources as superior. Katharine Viner, who
is the deputy editor of the Guardian, was able to perceptively explain
diminished trust in the face of fragmentation. According to Viner,
knowledge was previously contained in a fixed format that you
believed to be a reliable version of the truth (Viner). When alternative
sources were not readily available to the public at the end of the
twentieth century, trust was borne out of necessity. In other words,
Americans were reliant on fixed formats, which created a sense of

Kuznitz 3
allegiance. Fragmentation has stripped away all forms of dependence
and loyalty, thus directly lowering credibility. Interestingly enough, the
rise of digital media and its inclusive business model corrupts levels of
trust within news organizations as well. Journalists are more prone to
post breaking news that has yet to be confirmed, leading to a viral
spreading of mere rumors. Perhaps, the future may experience a
paradigm shift related to the shrinking trust of online reporting.
Nevertheless, current evidence strongly indicates the fragmentation of
news sources paved the way for a trend of declining credibility within
the mass journalistic sphere.
Click bait
As alternative platforms become widespread, traditional news
outlets are more desperate than ever to acquire a larger consumer
base and revitalize profit margins. Consequently, sensationalistic slants
are again on the rise to combat competition. This deviation from hardhitting news has furnished the momentum for decreasing trust over
the past fifteen years. Typically, while scanning the slew of tabloids
when in line at the grocery checkout, onlookers laugh at the headlines
featured on OK! Magazine or the National Enquirer. Yet, respectable
publications and newscasts are blurring the boundaries by
incorporating entertainment and scandalous news into their
repertoires. The transition to reduced confidence in reporting was
foreshadowed in research conducted by the Project for Excellence in

Kuznitz 4
Journalism. The Project studied the front pages of the New York Times
and the Los Angeles Times between 1977 and 1997. ABC, CBS, and
NBC Nightly News programs were also examined, alongside the covers
of Time and Newsweek magazines. Over the course of these two
decades, stories focused on celebrities jumped from one in fifty to a
staggering one in fourteen. Perhaps to compensate for this boost,
stories centered on government fell from one in three to one in five
(Current Problems in the Media). As mainstream media expends
greater energy in reporting soft news, the public worries that
journalists capacity for utter objectivity has been impaired. Straying
away from serious topics that leave little room for embellishment and
opinion has certainly taken its toll on overall trust. News consumers
and reporters alike have voiced this perspective on sensationalism.
Forty-one percent of journalists in the 2004 study How Journalists See
Journalists included sensationalistic coverage and lack of
objectivity on their lists of quality concerns (Kohut). Similarly, it
appears the 45% of respondents in the 2008 General Social Survey
who maintained hardly any confidence in the press were warranted
in their harsh evaluations (Current Problems in the Media). If mass
media wants to better entice the attention of the American public,
unnewsworthy topics will remain at the forefront. However, if the news
has any intention of halting its decreasing credibility, and perhaps

Kuznitz 5
driving in more revenues after all, restoring the intended purpose of
journalism is in order.
A game of monopoly
Similar to sensationalistic reporting, which precedes even yellow
journalism from the Spanish-American War, the problem surrounding
monopolies is not a modern notion. Controlling the news industry,
several corporations have further bolstered the transition to
heightened traditional media distrust. Evaluating the unrelenting
prevalence of media giants over the decades, multi-chain ownership
may have spurred the cultural shift facing mass journalism in recent
years. The erosion of trust most likely would have begun at the
community level of journalism, gradually seeping doubts into
mainstream outlets. In 1945, four out of every five newspapers was
owned on an independent basis (Current Problems in the Media). If
readers were wary of a community newspaper, they could have
reclaimed their assurance by switching to a neighboring towns
publication. Readers cannot indulge in this luxury in todays day and
age. Sydney Schanberg, a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, estimates:
Of the nation's 1,500 daily papers, nearly 1,200 about 80 percent
are owned by the big chains, which concentrate on reaping large
profits and are not much given to public self-examination on ethics and
quality issues (Current Problems in the Media). Subsequently, mass
media consolidation generates an interconnected web devoid of

Kuznitz 6
trust, threatening to crumble the crucial journalistic pillar of credibility.
This could very well be the case in which Hearst Newspapers is
concerned. The homepage of the corporation boasts: Hearst
Newspapers publishes 15 dailies and 34 weeklies in cities including
Houston, San Francisco, San Antonio, and Albany (Newspapers). On
a personal level, my levels of confidence would waver if I found fault in
the Connecticut Post and then selected to read The Advocate; it is
impossible to ignore both are jointly owned under the Hearst umbrella.
Despite the fact that this issue of several companies exerting a
colossal impact on mass media is not necessarily a new phenomenon,
consolidation certainly worsens peoples adverse perceptions and adds
fuel to the downward sloping trend regarding trust.
A reputation of errors
When Americans sit down to read their newspapers at the
breakfast table each morning, they would like to think every statistic
and quotation they encounter has been rigorously fact-checked and
verified. In reality, rampant inaccuracies are partially at fault for the
reduced trust toward media outlets. A Pew survey conducted in 2007
revealed that 53% of respondents believed news articles were often
inaccurate (Current Problems in the Media). Only two years later,
this already steep percentage jumped to 63%. People pore through the
pages of a newspaper to gain knowledge about current events.
Providing readers with false information renders this action pointless,

Kuznitz 7
undoubtedly driving down trust. Careless errors have also shaken up
the publics perception of the news. It is quite embarrassing that 35%
of the public in the 1999 American Society of Newspaper Editors poll
detected spelling and grammar discrepancies on a weekly basis
(Current Problems in the Media). To make matters worse, journalists
are well aware of their flawed reporting, yet are not taking strides to
eliminate errors and thus restore prior levels of increased credibility.
The Columbia Journalism Review found that 38% of 125 journalists
interviewed in 1999 seriously suspected a colleague of manufacturing
a quote or an incident (Current Problems in the Media). Fastforwarding to the 2004 How Journalists See Journalists survey, 45%
of journalists claimed news reports [were] full of factual errors
(Kohut). Each aforementioned statistic in and of itself provides
sufficient rationale in comprehending the publics transition in viewing
the media as increasingly untrustworthy. It would be illogical for
Americans to remain faithful to news organizations that are riddled
with dishonest material. Every mounting error degrades the integrity of
mainstream media. This, in effect, forces individuals to toss the now
seemingly worthless newspaper in the recycling bin and seek out
alternative sources cloaked in higher standards.
Politicians attack the media
In recent years, politicians have mercilessly degraded and
criticized the medias integrity, thereby aiding in the demise of

Kuznitz 8
journalistic credibility. Politicians exert this harmful impact by
dismantling the fourth estate. Coined by Edmund Burke, the three
estates represent the branches of government or parliament, while the
fourth estate is comprised of reporters. The theory claims the function
of the news is rooted in its role as a watchdog: The point is to
emphasize that the press is not a mere passive reporter of the facts,
but a powerful actor in the political realm (Buescher). Historically,
traditional media garnered an esteemed reputation for shedding light
on political activities. Ironically, this all-important duty now arouses a
lack of trust in the wake of an altered cultural lens courtesy of political
polarization. As the gap between policy viewpoints widens, distrust
increases if the news so much as alludes scathingly to political parties.
The 2014 Gallup survey captured the implications of this disparity.
Democrats recorded a 14-year-low trust score of 54% in the media,
while Republicans were one percentage point above their all-time-low
of 26% (McCarthy). Additionally, when political undertakings and
polarization peak during national elections, the negative paradigm shift
involving trust becomes apparent. The re-election of President George
W. Bush induced levels of trust to fall from 54% in 2003 to 44% in 2004
(McCarthy). In his book entitled Why Americans Distrust the News
Media and How it Matters, Jonathan Ladd asserts politicians who
desire public support feel threatened by independent sources of
information. Thus, they tend to use whatever means available to

Kuznitz 9
prevent the media from becoming a trusted independent source (Ladd
12). These means typically entail politicians attacking the press,
including reporters who uphold themselves to objectivity and
impartiality. Political figures want to be painted with a fictitious brush,
with all corruption and damaging evidence swept away. They despise
reporters who have changed from silent skeptics to vocal cynics
(Shafer). Relying on the powers of manipulation, politicians convince
their followers that reporters distort the facts due to personal biases. In
reality, politicians persuade their supporters to prefer publications
ranging from Slate to The Atlantic, with skewed content noticeably
reflective of political predispositions. To that end, political polarization
and the political arena as a whole have successfully propelled many
alternative news outlets into existence. This augments the
deterioration of the fourth estate, as well as mass media trust, in a
multi-faceted approach. With the 2016 presidential election and
ideological disputes well underway, the cultural shift surrounding faith
in reporters is likely to continue in a negative fashion.
A final word
As a journalism major and an aspiring reporter, I find this
negative paradigm shift to be particularly disheartening. In the
aftermath of diminished trust, citizens are at risk for leading
misinformed lives. By relinquishing trust, society places itself in a
vulnerable position that can be easily manipulated and deluded by

Kuznitz 10
persuasive online platforms, politicians, and media corporations. No
one single factor is to blame for this undesirable future prospect or for
the negative trend that has plagued the traditional journalistic sphere
for fifteen years. If the two primary culprits of this pattern the
journalistic business model and reputation begin to serve the
interests of the general public rather than themselves, mass media
could re-experience the glory days of the 1970s. Some issues, namely
sensationalistic and faulty reporting, could be reconciled more easily
with the implementation of professional, ethical standards. Afterwards,
journalism may have the momentum to rectify more complex
problems, including fragmentation and political criticisms, thereby
igniting a new transition to increasing trust levels.

Kuznitz 11

Works Cited
Buescher, John. "The 4th Estate as the 4th Branch."
Teachinghistory.org. Roy

Rosenzweig Center for History and New

Media at George Mason University, n.d. Web. 15 Nov. 2015.

"Current Problems in the Media." Dailysource.org. DailySource, n.d.
Web. 30 Oct.

2015.

Kohut, Andrew. How Journalists See Journalists in 2004: Views on

Profits,

Performance and Politics. Rep. Washington D.C.: Pew

Research Center, n.d.

Print.

Ladd, Jonathan McDonald. Why Americans Distrust the News Media

and How It Matters. Princeton: Princeton UP, 2010. Print.
McCarthy, Justin. "Trust in Mass Media Returns to All-Time Low."
Gallup.com. Gallup,

17 Sept. 2014. Web. 28 Oct. 2015.

Kuznitz 12
"Media Credibility & Crisis Reporting." Salzburg.umd.edu. Salzburg
Academy on

Media & Global Change, n.d. Web. 2 Nov. 2015.

"Newspapers." Hearst.com. Hearst Newspapers, 2015. Web. 4 Nov.

2015.
Rupp, Keith Lee. "Confidence Lost." Usnews.com. U.S. News & World
Report, 19 Sept. 2014. Web. 2 Nov. 2015.
Shafer, Jack. "The Public's Correct Not to Trust the Media." Politico.com.
Politico LLC,

30 Sept. 2015. Web. 15 Nov. 2015.

Viner, Katharine. "The Rise of the Reader: Journalism in the Age of the
Open Web."

Theguardian.com. Guardian News and Media Limited,

9 Oct. 2013. Web. 1 Nov. 2015.