Internet Gaining on TV and Newspapers?

Well, yes…and not necessarily. The Pew Research Center for the People & the Press has another survey, out this week, that’s informative, if you don’t misinterpret the findings. The clearest finding is that the Internet is becoming more of the medium for news for many folks than television. It certainly hasn’t overtaken it among all groups, though it has among people 19-29 years old. And even that conclusion is somewhat suspect. After all, you can watch a TV program online. Who gets the credit as the source—TV or “the internet”?

This fuzzy conclusion gets more obscured when you read about the internet’s supremacy over newspapers, which applies to the overall population, though not among the 50+ set. After all, whereas most folks don’t go to the internet to watch TV, I’ll bet a sizable portion of those who look for news online indeed go to newspapers sites. Which makes the conclusions here a little misleading.

[M]ore people continue to cite the internet than newspapers as their main source of news, reflecting both the growth of the internet, and the gradual decline in newspaper readership (from 34% in 2007 to 31% now).

…The internet also has grown as a news source for people ages 50 to 64; currently 34% say the internet is their main source of national and international news, nearly equal to the number who cite newspapers (38%), though still far below television (71%). There has been relatively little change in the how people age 65 and older get their news. The internet has risen to 14% from 5% in 2007, but is still far behind newspapers (47%) and television (79%) as a main source.

I wish the good folks at the Pew center (and I love their work) would have worded it differently.  But reading further, there are nuggets that should influence how political questions are debated.

College graduates are about as likely to get most of their national and international news from the internet (51%) as television (54%). Those with some college are just as likely as college grads to cite the internet as their main source (51%), while 63% cite television. By contrast, just 29% of those with no more than a high school education cite the internet while more than twice as many (75%) cite television.

For political operatives that may mean deploying different spokespeople for different media. For example, if it’s the lower middle class you want to target, send those folks who can sound as if they are one of them. I don’t mean that condescendingly. Joe Biden may make a good source on TV news because he has a working class persona, whereas John Kerry may not.

There is some unabashed good news in the survey results.

Reflecting the slow decline in the proportion of people getting most of their national and international news from television, the numbers specifically citing cable news outlets or broadcast networks as their main news source has fallen. When asked where on television they get most of their news, 36% name a cable network such as CNN, the Fox News Channel or MSNBC; 22% name ABC News, CBS News or NBC News; and 16% say they get most of their national and international news from local news programming.

TV is constrained by its format. Rarely are issues covered in-depth and without prejudice or bias. If more people read the news online, they would be caught up in the world of hyperlinks, taking them to new sources that allow them to gain more knowledge and hopefully a broader range of viewpoints, though that’s not guaranteed.

But here’s the best news. The percentage of people who say they get their news from radio has remained constant over the past 20 years. Alas, they all aren’t listening to NPR; many are Limbaugh ditto-heads. According to Carroll Doherty of the Pew Center, NPR’s audience mirrors the general demographics of the population, so both young and old are listening. Why has radio remained constant? Because traffic hasn’t improved most places. Radio listeners tend to be in their cars at the time.

Hitting Back

You can’t really tell much by this clip, but I’ve got to hand it to Sen. Judd Gregg. 

He may not be right on the issues.  He may be off-base on this particular exchange.  But I wish more politicians would take it to journalists when they think the question is unfair, the premise unfounded, or the question just stupid.

I would have loved to hear then Sen. Obama, responding to George Stuff-a-sock-in-his-puss’s question about whether he loved America more than Rev. Wright, say, “What an idiotic question!”

MSNBC Slanders ‘Boy in Balloon’ Family

UPDATE:  Given the reports that are now coming out, it appears the family deserves if not a flogging, certainly an admonishment.  The dad may wind up with a jail sentence.

Per my earlier real time post, here is the clip from Ed Schultz’s show tonight about the boy in the bubble and his “s-t-r-a-n-g-e” family.  It’s clear that MSNBC’s editors wanted to milk this story for all it was worth, even if it meant putting this family through a public flogging.  As the media showed footage of an object perhaps falling from the balloon, they feared their son was lying somewhere after falling thousands of feet to his death. 

Once it was learned he was OK, MSNBC and Schultz tried in every way to paint the family as irresponsible.  Listen to Schultz’s inquisition.

After this segment, Arianna Huffington was the guest.  He asked her what she thought of the story.  After saying that it was indeed a strange story, she asked, “Now that he is found, why are we still talking about this?”

I can never seem to upload MSNBC videos (the one above is from YouTube), so here’s the link —  It was quite an argument.

When I told my wife about this, she, as she is wont to do, cut to the chase.  “It’s the 24-hour news cycle.  They got to have something talk about.  We need a law:  They can only air news at 10, 2 & 6 – for one hour.”

It’s an idea worth considering.  Well, it’s at least as good as the journalism practiced here.