Survey: Public prefers news from professional journalists

Reynolds Journalism Institute
The public’s trust in the institution of the press may be fading, and digital platforms have opened the publishing world to anyone with a desire to speak, but it seems professional journalists themselves are not seen as obsolete.

More than 60 percent of U.S. adults say they “prefer news stories produced by professional journalists,” and more than 70 percent agree that “professional journalists play an important role in our society,” according to new survey data from the Reynolds Journalism Institute.

Respondents also disagreed with a social-media-centric model (that most news should come through trusted friends) and disagreed that it doesn’t matter who produces the news.

The first two bars in each chart below refer to mobile device users and non-users. More on them later.



The bad news is, the public doesn’t seem happy with how those professional journalists are doing their jobs. Only about 37 percent said they trust the mainstream media.

Trust in mainstream media was higher among women, and among people who get their TV news from major networks like ABC, CBS and NBC. Meanwhile, a majority of those who get news from Fox News distrust “mainstream” media (presumably they think Fox is not part of that cohort).

CNN watchers were the most “ambivalent,” with a plurality of 41 percent stating neither trust nor distrust.

The impact of mobile

This data is the fifth slice released from a large research project primarily focused on the impact of mobile devices on news consumption.

Mobile users had about the same overall levels of confidence in professional journalism and distrust of mainstream media.

It did find, though, that mobile news consumers were twice as likely to prefer CNN to other TV networks — perhaps a reflection of the company’s aggressive and successful embrace of mobile news apps.

Responses were pretty mixed when people were asked whether they expect to get “all” their news from mobile 10 years from now. Their skepticism is probably warranted. Other research has shown mobile users become “digital omnivores” who continue to use other platforms in addition to their phones and tablets.

On the business-model front, the survey showed little promise for moving audiences to paid content instead of the free, ad-supported model. Fewer than a quarter of people, mobile users or not, were willing to pay extra for news without ads.

Survey author Roger Fidler concludes his analysis: “Digital content produced by professional journalists for mobile media devices has perceived value, but charging for access, with or without advertising, will continue to present news organizations with a dilemma for the foreseeable future.”

Earlier: Tablets seem better than smartphones for paid content | Tablet owners read print newspapers, magazines less oftenTablet owners read national, local news more oftenMobile users spend 5x more with social media than with news apps.

We have made it easy to comment on posts, however we require civility and encourage full names to that end (first initial, last name is OK). Please read our guidelines here before commenting.

  • Anonymous

    “The Donald W. Reynolds Journalism Institute works with citizens, journalists and researchers to strengthen democracy through better journalism.”

    From their website.

    Sounds familiar.

  • http://twitter.com/jejohnson322 Joshua Johnson

    As heartening as this study is, I find a gigantic flaw with it: NPR IS A MAJOR NEWS OUTLET. Its listeners should have been included in the study also. PBS does not have a “newsroom” per se other than what it gets mostly from WNET and WETA, but NPR has an amazing, full-service news organization. Why overlook public radio?

  • http://twitter.com/melissabowerks Melissa Bower

    Depends on who identifies himself/herself as a professional journalist, though. There are a few online-only organizations in Kansas that claim to be news, but are actually linked to partisan nonprofit foundations. (That is, not simply supported by, but founded by partisan nonprofits that also fund lobbying). It breaks my heart every time I see a bit of information that sounds really valuable, then look into it and notice that all the writers in the contact list also happen to be Democrat precinct-committeepersons. Or Republican lawmakers. The public doesn’t know they’re not traditional journalists. They are wearing our masks and no one seems to care.