Generalize to the american population. We asked questions about the sources people use, how reliable they think they are, how they think the liability of news has changed over time. The liabilitys changed over time. We tried to look at the intersection between consumption and reliability. We found one third of people report the sources they use that they rely primarily on are less reliable than other sources. That is interesting because it adjusts they recognize the sources they are using are not that reliable, yet they continue to use them instead of other sources they see be more reliable. So that was very interesting and a puzzling finding that came out. Host defined for us what we mean by reliable. Does it mean they believe the information they are consuming is not correct or they think it is correct but biased . What do we mean . Reliable could include either of those things. The idea is that they trust that information to be credible, accurate, balanced all of those things are included in this concept of reliability. That isen you say 1 3, one third of the country but are using it anyway. That seems to be a contradiction. People think it is not reliable, but they are using it anyway. Why . Guest there are a couple different explanations. The bottom line is they are not prioritizing reliability and accuracy when seeking out news information. One possibility is it is a time constraint issue. They do not have time to seek out the information they know is more reliable. They may rely on social media and other things online rather orn reading a newspaper watching broadcast television, which tends to be rated more reliable. Another thing is that it is more about they prefer to use news as entertainment rather than seeking out facts. But it is still troubling. Host when we talk about news platforms, are we talking about broadcast, print, radio, and social media . Or are we just talking about broadcast, print, and radio . Guest i am including the full spectrum. We asked about broadcast, we asked about cable, separately from broadcast, we asked about print. We asked about online journalism, which would include politico and things that do not have print outlets as well as things like New York Times online. And we asked about social media and peers. A lot of people turn to peers for news. Host we hear more and more that people are getting their news from social media, from facebook, from twitter. How do they rank in this spectrum versus the traditional news outlets . Do people trust them more, do people trust unless . Or are they just conduits for traditional media . Guest trust in social media tends to be significantly lower than trust in broadcast or cable or print journalism. Online journalism is a little bit different, because that can include things like the Online Outlet of a print source. So trust there is a little higher. The interesting thing is that trust is very low in social media, but a lot of people, an increasing number of people, report that they are turning to social media to get their news. I think a key issue is trying to distinguish between the people using social media as their only source they are reading peoples posts to get news, and people using social media as a portal to get to other things. So looking at the posts from major news outlets and then going and reading the article. There is a big difference between getting your news in 280 characters or in a small Facebook Post and actually just using that to see what is being talked about or what is being published that day and going and reading the article yourself. Host what is truth decay . Rand is doing a big study on truth decay. We define as the diminishing role that facts, analysis, and data play in political discourse and in the policymaking process. Host how does that play into Peoples Trust or distrust of media . Guest we have four characteristic trends that we think are part of truth decay. St is the blur second is a blurring of facts and information. The third is the increasing relative volume of opinion. Thing about the amount of commentary and opinion the amouf commentary and opinion that is available to us, compared to the amount of just straight facts of journalism. Even if you are interested in finding facts, it can be difficult to find them. And the fourth is the declining trust for the sources of facts, the government and the media. Peopled that 41 of believe the news now is less reliable than it used to be in the past, and only 16 believe that news has become more reliable. Host we are going to open up our regular lines for this talk, so if you are a republican, we want to hear from you at 202 7488001. Democrats, 202 7488000. Independents, we want to hear from you at 202 7488002. Keep in mind you can always text us at 202 7488003. And we are always reading on social media, on twitter cspanwj, and on facebook, at journal cspan. Org facebook. Com cspan. Study come up where are you finding that people are actually getting their news from . From mostlyting it broadcast, are they getting it from the traditional newspapers, websites, or in the actual physical newspaper, or are they getting it from social media . Guest well, it is really a mix. Trying to understand whether people are using news and specific ways, certain platforms together come and we identified four types to characterize the way people use news. They are more likely to rely on print and broadcast together. Another group heavily dependent on online journalism. Another group rely on radio in we put in the radio group podcasts. And the other group relies on social media and their peers, friends and family during those of the way people use their news. Host according to a study from a broadcast was the most trusted media. Was there any difference in terms of sources of broadcast cnn, fox, msnbc did you see any difference in those . Guest we did not ask specifically about outlets, but youre right, that is an important news. Cable, they about can be thinking about fox, cnn host or cspan guest or cspan, exactly. We conducted a subsequent survey where we did ask about specific platforms. Host ok. The report also found that those who rely on social media and peers for news, like we were talking earlier, dont see those platforms as reliable, but they still tend to use them anyway. I mean, really, if you dont think something is reliable, why are they using it . ,uest well, like i said before the people who use social media, they can news is less reliable than it used to be in the past and know that their sources are not reliable are using social media mostly for entertainment. Making sure public is informed on the issues. I think one of the key responses that comes out of this is thinking about how do we convince people the facts and looking for accuracy in their news is really important. Host when you say they are using it for entertainment, i mean, i guess i am kind of unclear what you mean. They are using it just to amuse themselves . They are not really looking for facts or information . They just think it is cool, so they are reading it . Guest they are looking to educate, they are looking for something that is sensational, they want to see people arguing on social media, they want to read the thing that confirms their believes or makes them feel good or riles them up in some way. They are looking for an emotional response rather than the facts. That is what i mean by entertainment. Host gotcha. Lets turn to our collars in this number station, and lets go to marvin, who is calling from colorado. Marvin, good morning. Caller yes, i am very passionate about the bias in the only get two minutes, so i want to get as much as i can in her several months ago, on cspan, on booktv, and man wrote a book about how the farleft has taken over the media, and on fox news, just came outne with a new book about the media, and i think whether you are a democrat or republican, the news should not be bias. I watch all the time, and i like american news,ne news masks, i check on msnbc, cspan, about 100 , i have never seen i keep going back and forth just to see, and msnbc completely bashes trump about 100 of the time. As a matter fact, last night, there was a ceremony where President Trump gave past the military bill and the space bill and other things, and it was covered by fox, it was covered by one american news, and i msnbc, and they were talking about the impeachment, and this goes on and on and on. Whether you are a democrat or republican, the farleft has taken over the news media. Host go ahead and respond. Guest you are absolutely right that the way news. Is reported has changed. We conducted a study a couple of months ago where we try to understand the way in which that reporting has changed. We used a textual analysis, which allowed us to analyze the style and tone of the news reporting, and what we found was a clear shift from a factbased style of reporting to something that is much more subjective, personal opinion, argument advocacy, and we found looking in overtime for a soon your newspaper, for example, or over broadcast outlet, but the changes were even more dramatic when we look at the ship from traditional media, print media, to online journalism, and from broadcast to cable television. This shift is interesting, and it suggests that as the media environment changes with new types of technology, new ways of consuming news, we have seen a shift in bad news reporting. This is not necessarily a good or a bad thing, but it is important to understand that while we see news in these different ways, we are getting very different types of information. That is something to keep in mind for consumers as well as for journalists, to think about what types of language they want to use to communicate their news, what message are they sending in terms of the types of information that they are providing . Is it opinion . Is it commentary . Is it fact . Better job ofo a signaling to their readers, listeners, or viewers what type of information they are providing at a different time. Host what caused this shift . Was it just a shift in technology . How americant in people consume news . That shift you were talking about, have you pinpointed a specific reason for it . One is the technology could we produce news editor ways, whether through crowdsourcing, putting it on social media, or producing things for a mobile environment. A lot of people now consume their news in small bites, bitesize pieces on their phones. That shift causes a shift in style. Changes in the economics of the media industry, and in the search for profitability have the need to produce things that are cheap and have a high as high a profit margin as possible. And Investigative Journalism is expensive, and people do not have time to sit down and read the longform piece. Pieces of short information, short stories that capture peoples opinions, peoples anecdotes, and anecdotes are powerful, which is another reason they are used. If you can appeal emotionally to a reader, they are more likely to then keep reading. I think the search for probability and economic pressures that the media is facing plays a big role in explaining that shift as well. Host lets talk to gary, who is calling from kentucky on the republican line. Gary, good morning. Caller good morning. I compare this to a, uh, relay race. Cnn, you flip over to msnbc real quick, talking about the same thing, and i think you brought up when did the shift start, i think the shift started in 2016, with the election of trump, and when he pointed the finger at the media,. Nd i think the shift him then when the media shifted from reporting issues more important and those folks in the politics. So i dont really see another thing is that why people go to twitter is because they have done away with political ads. The people are just overwhelmed every day with political ads. Host go ahead and respond. Guest well, actually, our Research Suggests that the changes we have seen the news media have been occurring over a few decades, and we do not think it is specific to this administration. It is actually hard to pinpoint a specific date. It has evolved over time. And really the biggest change that has caused these shifts has been the technological changes and the way news has been disseminated. The emergence of the internet, the rise of social media, those things happened around 2000, but for the internet, 2010 for things like facebook and twitter, so these changes were things that we have seen occurring over time, and this is one of the reasons why we call this phenomenon truth decay, because it is not a specific point. It is something that has been occurring in eroding over time, whether it is Peoples Trust, changes that we see in the media environment, and our empirical analysis of the data we collected shows this, that these are things that have changed over times and are not specific to a political event or political administration. Host what does the decline in the use of more traditional news sources, Like Television and newspapers, they . That more and more Older Americans are getting on social media, and we actually have a social media follower here that wants to know why younger people are not watching cable news. According to him, the median age of a typical cable viewer for him as a bc and, cnn for msnbc, cnn, and fox news are 60 and older. But we also know that those viewers are going online. What does that say for the traditional forms of journalism, newspaper, radio, journalism, that the use of them is going down . Guest , as i said the real trend is not consumption, it is shifting to mobile and people getting news on their phone. It is a constant news portal that we have in our hands 24 hours a day. Young people are much more on my to rely on journalism and social media. They are much less likely to sit down in front of the television and watch cable news. Consumingf they are cable news at all, it is probably on their phone host on youtube, portal guest right, looking through the portal, so we see this shift, and that is the direction that things are moving. It is unlikely that a young person is going to sit down in front of a television. People do reason newspapers, but to sit down and read a whole newspaper cover to cover is just not likely. People are consuming news on the go, and that is one of the takeaways from our word that we just published, the News Consumption is a lifestyle choice, a habit, something that people integrate into their daily lives. Ways towe think about improve the way that people consume news or ensure that people are better informed, when he to think about that, about the fact that changes that occur in the news media need to not only focus on how information is disseminated and what information is disseminated but how to integrate it in peoples lives so that people get the most information. Host lets go to dan, who is calling from jackson heights, new york, on independent line. Dan, good morning. Caller good morning. The concept that she used originality, someone as unique as you. You need to watch her glucose. Why did you eat a doughnut . The problem is increasingly looking at the news for information, and the news is approximation, a profound, accurate presentation, even in the days when you were reading the newspaper. But now, people are not looking for information, they are looking for stimulation, they are looking for something that will boost their arousal in the morning, the way that coffee does or the way the doughnut does. And i dont think you should blame the media people, because they just want to make money. What you should be blaming is the culture of the United States now, where the only thing that counts is that you get host any response to that . Guest i think you are right that when we think about solutions to some of the challenges we face in terms of this information, the response does fall on the media and on individuals. It is important that we think about how do we convince people that facts matter, that they could be better informed and make better decisions about their lives if they do have facts, and if we spend that further, that our policymakers can make better decisions about major policy issues that face the country when they are also operating from an established set of facts. Does that shift and making sure, that people do see the value of this that is one of the purposes behind this truth decay project is thinking probably about what this issue is and not just the media these but also many other fingers of this problem in the way they extend through our political and civil discourse. I am trying to think about responses to that. And we do not have a specific, easy answer to that. It took us decades to get to this situation, and it is going to take us time to get out of it. But if i give the public, that individuals hold a responsibility in terms of looking for facts and seeking them out and acting on them, you are absolutely right. Host are there factors and demographics that shape News Consumption . Age, race, married, political affiliation. What do those factors have to play, and how do they affect News Consumption . Differentple do make decisions on News Consumption based on the factors you mentioned. People with a College Degree or more are much more likely to rely on print and broadcast journalism than are people who only have a high school diploma. They tend to turn toward social media as their source. Age is another big factor, which we talked about. Young people are much more likely to look online. Older people are much more likely to rely on more traditional forms of media, print, broadcast t television. Women who are married also rely on online social journalism. Host did you see any difference in political affiliation . Guest political affiliation does not matter that much for News Consumption. It does matter for trust in the media, but it does not matter that much for how people make decisions about consumption. Did you putere political ideology as far as trust in these medias . Guest we looked at reliability, so it is a little bit different there, but we found that people who did not vote for president clinton president clinton, excuse me who did not vote for Hillary Clinton were much less likely to say that news had become more unreliable. Host lets go to skyler, who was calling from laurel, maryland on the democratic line. Skyler, good morning. Caller hi. Thanks for taking the call, and you may have already answered this question, but i have been waiting, so i figured i would ask it anyways. I am wondering what does the data show for when this shift sort of went from people looking newsacts from news, their sources versus them looking for more entertainment from their news sources . Is there anything that you can say about whether or not people are really looking facts, are they even looking for the truth, or do they just want entertainment now . When did that happen, and our people even looking for the truth . Guest well, i think that there is not a specific point. It is really difficult to pinpoint a specific date or even a specific moment or events that caused this shift, it is something that has really evolved over time. Of increase of diversity news sources that we have, the rapid expansion of the volume of disinformation that has permeated throughout the Information System has really undermined Peoples Trust. The blurring of the line between fact and opinion, the spread of commentary in place of factbased reporting, these are all things that have affected peoples attitudes toward the news, that have caused them to turn away from and to field is disaffected. It is a confluence of things that have shifted over time that have shifted peoples attitudes, caused them to be less interested in looking for facts. Partly because it is harder. It takes more time now to find that factbased information, because there is so much information out there, which is great that we have all of this Information Available but also makes a challenge of finding the factbased information much harder. Host do pay walls affect how people consume news . We are talking about mobiles. People are moving towards further news. Do pay walls affect News Consumption . Guest i think so. I think sometimes people are unwilling to pay for journalism when they think they can get so much information for free. Host get something for free. Guest right, get something for free, so they may just turn to those resources, and they may be unwilling to pay subscription fees to get access to the sources that do put stuff behind a walls. A barrierthen create to getting that factbased information viewed at the same time, if you think about it from the medias perspective, how do the journalism, if they are not earning any income, and they are putting everything out there for free . As people shift away from paying for new subscriptions and getting newspapers delivered to their house, how do they make a sustainable, profitable news product if they are not getting any sort of funding . So i think that this is something that shifts to having a pay wall is a big decision for Media Companies, and it is something that i think does then presumption of news, people who do pay, people who are not willing to pay are getting access to different information, and as i mentioned before, our studies show that these types of information are really different in what they are providing people, not just different content but actually different style in a different type of information. Host lets talk to nancy, who is calling from eden prairie, minnesota on the republican line. Nancy, good morning. Caller good morning. Thank you for taking this call. One, Net Neutrality is supposed to be done, which it does not happen. Number two, and i just heard her talk about just a minute, i have got to turn this off. Oh, my god. Host just keep going, ask your question. Caller anyway, the fact i cannot turn that thing off. The fact is, everything is so biased, and the newspaper here, which is being paid for, it is being totally biased, and when i hear it is like fraud. It is like when they are reporting something, they are reporting what the celebrities are talking about on the cable and elsewhere, the journalism people are not even digging to find truth. Host there are journalists that trying to provide the best information. It can be difficult to disentangle facts and opinion. They are increasingly blurred bo th on online and in print newspapers. We recommendings in our report is that we think about ways to have better labeling of information. So, whats a fact. Whats speculation. Whats opinion . And when are journalists switching between them. Having better labeling would make it easier for consumer to know. Now i am consuming fact and now i am reading commentary. Ifhave better distinctions, we are able to disentangle the fact and opinion it would be easier for consumers to find the kind of information they are looking for. Way, obviously, you think the News Companies could help their consumers. Are there any other way media practices any other Media Companies need to adopt to help news consumers figure out what is reliable and once not and whats not . Key one,at is the providing better labeling or making clear distinctions. In the past, there was a clear line between reporting and opinion and now they really are mixed. Sometimes within the same article as well as on the same pages. Theher way focuses less on distinction between types of information and thinking about how media can better engage the reader so they are motivated to find facts. This idea about what form it does news come in . How do we better integrate highquality journalism and to people lies . Whether that in peoples lives, whether that means providing short factbased pieces that people can consume on their phones but have all the relevant information, or be more careful about making sure that headlines and the 280 short captures the facts. How do we get the high quality journalism into short form pieces that people can consume in a bite sized way they are consuming news lets talk to lil from texas. Ahead with your question. I have a comment and then a question. We live in a free society and we are dependent on our news sources and trump has done everything in his power to undermine that process. My question is, in your research, knowing that the major news outlets in the u. S. Are owned by political operatives, did you find in your be factual, that to byt news sources are owned factions, democratic or republican, so that we dont get the straight news from general news sources . News first, are our major organizations owned by political operatives . Guest i dont think thats true, i dont think theres any evidence to support that. I think there are news outlets, not all of them, but some of them have political spin that appeal to one side more than the other. This goes back to the economics of the media industry. Companiesitable, often have to appeal to a niche set of viewers and provide things that support what they believe or are interested in looking at. This goes back to that we like to be right, we are looking for news that will confirm what we believe is right, it gives us a dopamine hit. News companies, knowing that, are increasingly tailoring news to focus on these niche audiences. That is a separate point from the ownership of these companies. The motives go back to profit. Ben, callingalk to from smyrna, tennessee on the republican line. Caller good morning. Degree, and irs pride myself on being informed. I will be honest with you, i have not watched main street media or newspapers and probably 10 years. It seems to me there very biased they are very biased. And it seems like outside of fox news, they seem to provide a very liberal perspective. Host where you get your news . You say you dont watch mainstream news. From talkget my news radio and i get stuff offline and i do my own independent research to validate that information. My question is, because i find it i talked to a lot of people, and i find that most people dont trust the Mainstream Media anymore. The Mainstream Media says they are not political, but when you watch interviews, it seems very political, and it seems they are not telling the whole story or giving you information, and i know there was a study where they looked at news media that said they were political but when they looked at voting records, putting much everyone who works for the mainstream news outlets vote democrat. I think what we are finding is people dont trust the Mainstream Media, and i have even talked with millennials who dont. Do we have any evidence when we look at the major networks, that there actually is a somewhat either to the left and not telling information, making stuff up, and not just giving the facts, but giving their opinion . I find that to be very evident when you read the newspapers and watch tv today. The studies that have been conducted looking at whether or not there is an overall political bias in the media has found no real evidence of a significant bias one way or the other. When they take the whole media environment and all of the news that is produced into account. Theres not that much evidence to support this idea that there is a strong leftward or rightward bias. As i said previously, i do think there are certain sources that tend to cater toward one or the other audience, and i also agree with hundred percent 100 with you that there is so much commentary now, and the amount of commentary and opinion can feel overwhelming and it can feel difficult to find factbased information, even for someone who spends a lot of time doing that and spends a lot of time navigating the information space. One of the solutions that has been proposed is the idea of media literacy, training individuals to do a better job, or have the skills they need to navigate the navigation environment, distinguish between make and speculation, to good decisions about sources and to seek out the most credible ones. That is one way we can think about solutions and helping people to do a better job navigating this environment. I also agree there is clear evidence that trump in the media across the board is very low, thats including that trump in the media trust in the media across the board is very low, and that includes online. Host what other research on truth did decay will you be doing . Guest we have a broad agenda not just focusing on news, but other pieces of the problem. We have a study that asks specifically about trust in different types of media as well as different pieces of the government, state and local as well as favorite as federal. We are looking at the military. We have studies looking at cognitive bias, which plays a big role. I said,to be right, as we are easily tricked in believing false information. We want to understand the relationship between biases and truth decay, and to think about ways to counteract the biases to make better decisions. Were also thinking about civic education. We are also thinking about civic education. Understanding citizenship is a big part. Seeking out facts. And we are looking globally. On thee focused mainly u. S. , but we see a lot of analogues of this problem in europe and asia. We are trying to understand, is the same thing happening elsewhere, and what is different, so we can think about this not just as an american phenomenon but a global one. Host lets get a couple more questions imputed jim questions in. Jim is calling from virginia on the independent line. Caller i want to congratulate misses cavanaugh, she is 100 right. I cannot disagree. Propaganda, the problem is salesmanship, the problem is journalism that has become another sports broadcast. Affairs covering public like it is ballgames. You have journalists who will support one team over another. This is not the way the First Amendment was designed. We should have journalism and not propaganda. Guest i agree 100 . I think we would be better served by having a media and journalism that was more factbased and made it easier for us to find the facts and evidence, and made it more transparent about how news was created. I would love to know more about how a journalist put together a story, the sources consulted, the things they found that they did not trust and discarded. All of that information could be useful to a Media Consumer to understand more about the way it is produced and what they are consuming. I think that understanding the shift from a more objective news reporting to a more subjective one is one that we at rand are continuing to study, trying to understand what is the impact, how do i consume subjective or personal news in a different way than i would consume something more factbased . The reason we want to understand this is if there are differences, if i am more susceptible to false information when it is presented in a subjective way or told as a story, that Say Something about what we might want to think about as we move forward in terms of the media we want for our future. Host we would like to think nn