Poll: 77% of Americans Blame Media for Making Economic Crisis Worse

[kernel crash]

I've been feeling the same way the last few months. A year ago the unemployment rate across the country was averaging about 5%. But we were in an election cycle and the press started hammering us with how bad things were in the economy, in Iraq, on Main street and on the whole planet (see global warming). It doesn't happen overnight but over time, like a virus, it starts to seep in and affects people's perceptions on how there doing. Even if there doing pretty good they start thinking its looking pretty bad out there maybe I better cut back and wait this out. When enough people do that it becomes a self fulfilling cycle.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=prnw.20090101.LATH004&show_article=1

[Slider]

So it would be better if we stuck our heads in the ground?

This whole 'blame the media' thing is just plain stupid. No one wants to take responsibility for anything these days. If you don't have the brains to draw your own conclusions, blame your parents, not the media.

Slider

[catbbq]

Assuming your right, then things should start to improve as soon as Obama takes office.

[Mr_Cheeze]

So.... then I guess Congress, along with the banking industry and the domestic auto makers, as well as numerous other industrial and commercial entities, are just taking advantage of the opening that the complicit media has given them?

I wouldn't characterize this as a "conspiracy" theory, but as theories go, it ranks right up there with the most inane of tin foil hat concoctions.

[kernel crash]

Hey I didn't conduct the poll. But 77% is pretty significant don't you think. I'm sure there's a few Democrats and liberals in that 77%. My point is when I see the news and somebody like Katie Couric puts on that woe is me face and shows us a story about somebody that rolled the big dice on a designer mortgage product and is now losing their home I ask myself why aren't we seeing more stories about people who are bucking the trend and thriving in todays tough economy? I'm sure those stories are out there but bad news and disasters make for a better prime time lead. Again 77% so that puts me in with the majority. No conspiracys necessary to understand the point here.

[kernel crash]

Assuming your right, then things should start to improve as soon as Obama takes office.

Yes. Wait about 6 months.

[Mr_Cheeze]

And yet, if 77% of Americans believed, as this poll proclaims, that the media is making much ado, then one would think that those 77%, at least, would not have their consumer confidence so shaken. How scientific can this poll be when the results fly in the face of reality?

More likely, this poll is a concoction of consumer marketers who want to instill more confidence in consumers. Nothing scientific about that at all. It's Marketing 101 at it's most fundamental level.

[Slider]

My point is when I see the news and somebody like Katie Couric puts on that woe is me face and shows us a story about somebody that rolled the big dice on a designer mortgage product and is now losing their home I ask myself why aren't we seeing more stories about people who are bucking the trend and thriving in todays tough economy?

Step AWAY from the Times. Sir, drop the Economist. No one needs to get hurt here. Just walk away from the newstand. Drop the mouse, too, sir.

Hey, read Sports Illustrated. Highlights. Reader's Digest, but avoid I Am Joe's Spleen. Too graphic.

Slider

[kernel crash]

Step AWAY from the Times. Sir, drop the Economist. No one needs to get hurt here. Just walk away from the newstand. Drop the mouse, too, sir.

Hey, read Sports Illustrated. Highlights. Reader's Digest, but avoid I Am Joe's Spleen. Too graphic.

Slider

WTF are you talking about? Lack of an intelligent comeback?

Right now mortgage applications are at their highest point in the last 5 years. I bet a lot of people would be surprised by that fact. I was. That's my point. As far as the Times you can't be serious. I'll chalk that up to too much holiday cheer on your part.

[Slider]

I don't understand what you are proposing. That we ignore the enormous financial meltdown we are now facing and take comfort from the fact that lots of people are refinancing? Sound bites like that, without the far broader picture, are useless. That is why real news touches all the bases, without the gift wrapping.

Slider

[Mr_Cheeze]

WTF are you talking about? Lack of an intelligent comeback?

Right now mortgage applications are at their highest point in the last 5 years. I bet a lot of people would be surprised by that fact. I was. That's my point. As far as the Times you can't be serious. I'll chalk that up to too much holiday cheer on your part.

Dude, come on. You can't seriously buy that poll as legit. It's nothing more than a contrived ploy to try and raise consumer confidence. You need go no further than the source of the article.

[kernel crash]

Dude, come on. You can't seriously buy that poll as legit.

You don't know that. Where's your proof. I suspect that poll is closer to the truth than not based on conversations I've had with people.

[kernel crash]

I don't understand what you are proposing. That we ignore the enormous financial meltdown we are now facing and take comfort from the fact that lots of people are refinancing? Sound bites like that, without the far broader picture, are useless. That is why real news touches all the bases, without the gift wrapping.

Slider

I'm not proposing a damn thing. Check my original post. I find it interesting that at a time of declining viewership of TV broadcast news a survey finds that "Seventy-seven percent of Americans believe that the U.S. media is making the economic situation worse by projecting fear into people's minds." The article goes on to state "The US survey of 1000 adults was conducted by Opinion Research Corporation and is statistically representative of the total U.S. population."

The poll was conducted by Opinion Research Corporation. "ORC is known as a leader in providing both custom and omnibus research and is the official partner of CNN for the CNN/Opinion Research Poll(R)." Official partner of CNN. Not exactly a right wing organization. Nobody's talking about ignoring the "enormous financial meltdown". I suspect the 77% of people questioned here were suspicious of the sky is falling mentality and were looking for a more balanced reporting. (And looking back at the most recent financial bailouts I'd say their suspicions were justified.)

[Slider]

People who think the media is too focused on the bad side of the economic crisis don't want "more balanced reporting", they want exactly the opposite. And, if the demand is truly great enough, they'll get it, under all the accepted laws that govern the free market. The problem is that most of us don't really want happy news, we want the truth. That's what ultimately puts papers that pander to the idiotic side of the public curiosity out of business. There is plenty of 'feel good' news out there, but people know better than to mistake it for journalism.

What people tell pollsters has more to do with the poll than the opinions of the respondants. Some polls are balanced and others are not, but the free market is the one poll that is infallible regarding public opinion.

Slider

[BG]

People who think the media is too focused on the bad side of the economic crisis don't want "more balanced reporting", they want exactly the opposite. And, if the demand is truly great enough, they'll get it, under all the accepted laws that govern the free market. The problem is that most of us don't really want happy news, we want the truth. That's what ultimately puts papers that pander to the idiotic side of the public curiosity out of business. There is plenty of 'feel good' news out there, but people know better than to mistake it for journalism.

What people tell pollsters has more to do with the poll than the opinions of the respondants. Some polls are balanced and others are not, but the free market is the one poll that is infallible regarding public opinion.

Slider


I don't have anything but...WOW, just fuc#ing WOW

[kernel crash]

There is plenty of 'feel good' news out there, but people know better than to mistake it for journalism.
Slider


So a journalist could never do a story that has a "feel good" element to it? People don't want happy news, they want the truth. Do the two always have to be mutually exclusive?

[Slider]

People don't want happy news, they want the truth. Do the two always have to be mutually exclusive?

Depends on the times. These days, if we are talking financial news, you need a microscope for the slim upside. "I restructured our debt and saved the house" is the most you can expect, or "I got a great deal on a Ford." The reason those deals were possible is due to the fact that the economy is in the tank. That's the story, and it has to be the lead for any responsible source of news.

Wait for at least 12 months for the real 'upside' stories to have merit. Maybe 2 years.

Slider

[Mr_Cheeze]

You don't know that. Where's your proof. I suspect that poll is closer to the truth than not based on conversations I've had with people.

The "proof" is Occams Razor. The simplest explanation is the most likely. In other words, common sense. The only reason you are buying into this poll is because it tells you something you want to believe.

[kernel crash]

The "proof" is Occams Razor. The simplest explanation is the most likely. In other words, common sense. The only reason you are buying into this poll is because it tells you something you want to believe.



Definition = "The principle states that the explanation of any phenomenon should make as few assumptions as possible, eliminating those that make no difference in the observable predictions of the explanatory hypothesis or theory."

Seems to me your glossing over the the most basic assumption here that maybe, just maybe, these respondents to the poll were saying how they truly felt. Instead your jumping over that "simplest explanation" and coming up with a Freudian theory that I am projecting my feelings about this poll because this is something I want to believe when you don't know jack sh!t about me and what I want to believe. Now tell me, how does that make you feel?

[Mr_Cheeze]

Wow... dude. You're taking this poll WAY too seriously. My opinion had nothing to do with you or how I think that you think. There's no Freudian overtures or anything of the like. No need to attack me. Chill.

Believe me, I missed no "basic assumption". What you seem to miss, or more likely ignore, is how the results of this poll completely contradict reality. If 77% of respondents, who are somehow supposed to represent all of America, were not so shaken with their confidence in the economy, and yet, continue to tighten their proverbial belt buckles, something seems off. There's one part of the Razor. The other is that it is well within the interests and capabilities of marketing companies, hired by big chains and manufacturers, to hire the polling company to create a poll that heavily leans in a direction showing a particular result, in this case, a positive one.

So a few questions come to mind. One, why are you so willing to take to heart this particular poll, and dismiss the notion that polls are easily manipulated to show a desired result? Why are you so easily dismissing the probability (high, IMO) that this poll was simply contrived in order to boost consumer confidence? Do you really think it is more likely that there is a vast media "conspiracy", if you will, to create or exaggerate something simply to make for better news? That's out there, bro.

[kernel crash]

Wow... dude. You're taking this poll WAY too seriously.


Not really. I'm responding to the automatic assumption here that the poll is a sham without any proof. I didn't read this poll and come away with the idea that this 77% thought that everything was just fine and the press was making a big deal out of nothing. I believe these people know exactly what's at stake here. I mean how could they not. They get hammered with it everyday. Even Obama has to have a press conference almost every day now to tell us that things are getting worse. Here's my point. It's OK to tell people the seriousness of the situation but people also want to hear a confident voice saying well get through this, we've overcome worst situations in the past. Give us a plan that people can understand, get behind and believe in. That's at the heart of consumer confidence. People want to believe the glass is half full. The main stream media doesn't give you any of that. All the focus is on the negative. With the main stream media the glass is half empty and leaking. I think that's what those 77% in the poll were trying to say.

[Slider]

It's OK to tell people the seriousness of the situation but people also want to hear a confident voice saying well get through this, we've overcome worst situations in the past.

I'm not among those who think we need to manipulate the masses to get the right response. I am of the camp that thinks that the masses, given accurate information, respond appropriately. We get enough manipulation from advertising. We don't need it from news sources.

Your Stalin tagline is relevant here. He was a master of propaganda.

Slider

[kernel crash]

I'm not among those who think we need to manipulate the masses to get the right response. I am of the camp that thinks that the masses, given accurate information, respond appropriately. We get enough manipulation from advertising. We don't need it from news sources.

Your Stalin tagline is relevant here. He was a master of propaganda.

Slider

Man you live in a very dark place. I would need some serious medication if I lived there. Manipulate the masses? Where did you come up with that from my post? No manipulation needed or requested from me. Gives us the hard facts? We got the facts. We have multiple sources to get all the hard facts. Were reminded of those facts every single day. Maybe you see the glass as half empty. I see it as half full. It still has the same volume. It still coveys the same information. We both have a firm grasp of that information. But once I have that information I don't need to have it thrown in my face 24/7 over and over and over again. I want to move on. I'm an optimistic person. I'll continue to monitor the facts as they change and make my decision accordingly. But I don't need to let it become such a drain on my psyche that I end up joining you in that dark place.

[Slider]

So don't read the news! There is plenty of entertainment to be had, but expecting it from businesses focused on providing accurate information is just plain misdirected. Skip the front couple of sections of the paper and head to the Living section, or Sports.

A 'dark place' is what you get with your head in the sand. Knowledge is light.

Slider

[kernel crash]

So don't read the news!
Slider

I average about 2 1/2 hours a day of televised network "news". Another 1 to 2 hours of news from the internet, and I devour the local newspaper in my town. I don't think "head in the sand" is an appropriate description for me.

[Slider]

But it seems to be either what you advocate for others, or assume they want using the poll as the basis. I think others want what you and I do, not what that poll says. And when it comes time to surf or buy a paper, they pick the sources that have the content they want.

Slider

[catbbq]

I think you guys are making good points, you know, when your not insulting each other's mothers.

We have CNN, CNBC, Fox News, MSNBC, CNN Headline, etc, etc, etc. There isn't enough news for a single 24 hour news channel, much less multiples. So they have to sensationalize to keep people coming back for, in case of the Kernel, 2.5 hours a day.

The 3.5 to 4.5 + local news papers a day is a bit much, in my opinion. That is a quarter of most people's waking hours. And you already said the news is nothing but regergitated negativity right now anyway. Perhaps you should take up some nice outdoor activities. I hear biking is nice.

[Mr_Cheeze]

I average about 2 1/2 hours a day of televised network "news". Another 1 to 2 hours of news from the internet, and I devour the local newspaper in my town. I don't think "head in the sand" is an appropriate description for me.

That's an awful lot of electronic media intake for one who acts so jaded. I still don't get what you think any entity, be it the President, or the media, would gain by purposely exaggerating the state of the economy, or why you choose to believe this particular poll when, in all likelihood, that jaded outlook of yours did not allow you to necessarily buy into other polls. Don't think that just because the pollster is supposedly neutral that they aren't manipulating results to satisfy whomever is paying them to enact the poll.

You may be right in that poll respondents are just trying to take the rosy outlook. But that's not an indictment of the media.

I think FOX News is getting into your head.

[BG]

Head in the sand nothin'...it's about time you people pull your heads out of your *******s. This thread isn't even entertainment anymore.

[kernel crash]

The 3.5 to 4.5 + local news papers a day is a bit much, in my opinion. That is a quarter of most people's waking hours. And you already said the news is nothing but regergitated negativity right now anyway.

Good Point but those hours might be a bit misleading to some. I'm not sitting in front of the TV for all those hours mentioned. Most of it is background filler. The news is on in the morning when I'm getting ready for work and getting myself fed. Might catch some news on the radio during the commute to work. Same at night when I'm getting supper ready and the obligatory clean up afterwards. My job keeps me in front of a computer for most of the day. So it's not too hard to see where I came up with those numbers. Delete the soft news junk from those hours and what do you really end up with? An hour a day of hard news? Besides I still have time for the Simpsons every night to keep things in perspective.

[kernel crash]

still don't get what you think any entity, be it the President, or the media, would gain by purposely exaggerating the state of the economy,

I think FOX News is getting into your head.

Exaggerate! I never used that word and you won't find it in the original article I reference to. "embellishing negative news" was the basis of that article. Read it again. But the main stream media would never do such a thing. Right? By the way, what your obsession with Fox news. That's getting a bit knee jerk on your part don't you think. I see about 1/2 hour of Fox news a week mostly "Cashin In" looking for news and tips on the stock market.

[kernel crash]

I think FOX News is getting into your head.

I think it may be getting into a lot of people's heads. But hey, its just a poll you can choose to disregard.


"FAIRFIELD, Conn.—A Sacred Heart University Poll found significantly declining percentages of Americans saying they believe all or most of media news reporting. In the current national poll, just 19.6% of those surveyed could say they believe all or most news media reporting. This is down from 27.4% in 2003. Just under one-quarter, 23.9%, in 2007 said they believe little or none of reporting while 55.3% suggested they believe some media news reporting...

The most trusted national TV news organizations, for accurate reporting, in declining order included: Fox News (27.0%), CNN (14.6%), and NBC News (10.90%). These were followed by ABC News (7.0%), local news (6.9%), CBS News (6.8%) MSNBC (4.0%), PBS News (3.0%), CNBC (0.6%) and CBN (0.5%).

In 2003, CNN led Fox News on “trust most for accurate reporting” 23.8% to 14.6%."

http://www.sacredheart.edu/pages/20786_americans_slam_news_media_on_believability.c fm