How Journalism Works

Click on image to see a readable version. 

What Americans Know, and Don’t, About How Journalism Works

The Media Insight Project's 2018 study, "What Americans Know, and Don’t, About How Journalism Works," reveals a significant gap between the public's understanding of journalistic terms and processes and what journalists expect the public to know. This disconnect highlights the need for greater clarity and transparency in journalism.

One of the key findings is the public's unfamiliarity with basic journalistic terms. For instance, 50% of Americans are only slightly familiar with the term "op-ed," which refers to opinion pieces written by guest writers or columnists. Similarly, 43% of adults do not understand the meaning of "attribution," a fundamental concept in journalism where the source of information is identified. Additionally, 57% of the public is unfamiliar with "native advertising," which is paid content designed to resemble editorial content.

Journalists, on the other hand, generally believe that the public's understanding of these terms is even lower than it actually is. For example, while 50% of the public knows about op-eds, only 33% of journalists expect the public to be familiar with the term. This discrepancy extends to other concepts as well, such as the difference between an editorial and a news story, and the role of anonymous sources in reporting.

Anonymous sources, a common but controversial aspect of journalism, are somewhat understood by the public. About 58% of people correctly believe that when journalists use anonymous sources, they know the source's identity but choose not to reveal it in their reports. However, 42% of the public is either unsure or believes that journalists do not know the source's identity. This confusion suggests that news organizations need to better explain their use of anonymous sources to build trust with their audience.

The study also explores the public's perception of "fake news," a term popularized in recent years, particularly by former President Trump. While the original definition referred to completely false information created for profit, the term has evolved to encompass a broader range of meanings. A significant portion of the public now associates "fake news" with real news organizations making mistakes, spreading conspiracy theories, or even producing content that is biased or sloppy. This expanded definition reflects the growing skepticism towards the media and the blurred lines between fact and opinion in news reporting.

To address these challenges, the study suggests that journalists should focus on increasing transparency in their work. This includes clearly distinguishing between news and opinion pieces, providing more information about sources, and explaining the reporting and editing processes. Such steps are seen as crucial for rebuilding public trust in journalism, especially in an era where misinformation and "fake news" are pervasive concerns.

In summary, the Media Insight Project's study underscores the need for the media to improve public understanding of journalistic practices. By enhancing transparency and clarity, journalists can help bridge the knowledge gap and foster a more informed and trusting audience.

Source: What Americans know, and don't, about how journalism works - American Press Institute