We comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable. We stand for Truth, Justice and the American Way (Is it a coincidence that Superman鈥檚 alter-ego Clark Kent was a mild-mannered reporter for a great metropolitan newspaper?).
Sure, we know that in surveys about admired and trusted lines of work, journalists customarily rate near the bottom of the list, somewhere between used car salesmen and members of Congress. And we all know of egregious abuses of the power of the press that we like to blame for those low approval ratings.
But in general, we tend to see journalism as a higher civic calling, speaking truth to power, shining a light where it鈥檚 most needed. The motto on the masthead of the Washington Post says it all: 鈥淒emocracy Dies In Darkness.鈥� And we like to think our fellow citizens support the values that guide our work.
What are those values? media critic Margaret Sullivan recently characterized them this way:
Oversight. We鈥檙e the watchdogs keeping an eye on government officials and other powerful people and institutions.
Transparency. We believe it鈥檚 best to put information out in the open, not keep it hidden.
Factuality. It鈥檚 crucial to provide as much accurate information as possible to get to the truth.
Spotlighting wrongdoing. We think society鈥檚 problems are best solved by exposing them to public criticism.
Giving a voice to the voiceless. It鈥檚 our job to advocate for those lacking power or social standing.
I think you鈥檇 be hard-pressed to find a reputable journalist who didn鈥檛 see this as, at the least, an aspirational expression of our touchstones as a professional culture. The official leans heavily on exactly these values.
But according to research recently released by the , it seems most Americans don鈥檛 believe those values to be all that valuable.
As the researchers put it, 鈥淲hen journalists say they are just doing their jobs 鈥� the problem is many people harbor doubts about what the job should be.鈥�
Some major findings of the report:
- Only one of the five core journalism values tested has support of a majority of Americans: the idea that more facts get us closer to the truth (67% of adults support this).
- There is least support for the idea that a good way to make society better is to spotlight its problems. Only 29% agree.
- Only 11% of Americans fully support all five of the journalism values tested.
- But support for these journalism values does not break cleanly around party or ideology. Instead, there is a link to differences in moral instincts, which cut across demographics and ideology.
- People who most value loyalty and authority are much less likely than others to endorse the idea that there should be a watchdog over those in power.
- Americans who most value care and fairness, meanwhile, are more likely to think society should amplify the voices of the less powerful.
Like Margaret Sullivan, my initial inclination was to push away these findings. I feel deeply that these guiding journalistic values have proven their worth over many decades. I can point to many cases鈥攆rom the iconic Watergate investigation all the way down to an expos茅 I did years ago of a shady developer on a small island in Washington State -- where adherence to these principals has led to positive changes, in law, in policy and in social attitudes.
But the inescapable fact is that public trust in the mainstream media is low, and falling. A from last September found: Four in 10 U.S. adults say they have 鈥渁 great deal鈥� (9%) or 鈥渁 fair amount鈥� (31%) of trust and confidence in the media to report the news 鈥渇ully, accurately, and fairly,鈥� while six in 10 have 鈥渘ot very much鈥� trust (27%) or 鈥渘one at all鈥� (33%).
And while the news media have never been terribly popular (the human tendency to shoot the messenger who brings bad tidings goes way back), the total percentage of people in the 鈥渢rust a great deal/a fair amount鈥� categories has dropped pretty steadily from a high of 55% in 1999 to 40% now.
The key finding that most surprised me was that political ideology turns out not to be the major alienating factor we鈥檝e thought it was. It seems that certain types of people hold certain types of values, and that those moral instincts, more than partisan considerations, were the dividing line in their support鈥攐r lack of it鈥攆or the way journalists define our jobs.
So, who are these people and how do their moral instincts influence how they view what journalism should be?
I鈥檒l pick up that thread in my column in the next issue of the 老夫子传媒 Journal, when I look at what the Media Insight Project says journalists can do to bridge this values gap.
