Updated: 02/02/2010

The Decline of

TV News Credibility

Although TV news has its moments of shinning success, (such as the coverage of the terrorist attacks on the East Coast of the United States in September, 2001, and the invasion of Iraq in March, 2003), over the last few decades the credibility of TV news in general has declined.

Here are just a few reasons why:

The significant drop in press freedom and credibility in the United States in recent years has meant that some U.S. viewers are turning to the foreign news broadcasts such as the BBC (the British Broadcasting Corporation) and CBC (the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation) for a more comprehensive version of the news.

News and Politics

A study conducted by USC's Annenberg School for Communication and the University of Wisconsin-Madison analyzed newscasts of 122 local TV stations in the nation's largest media markets during the 2002 mid-term elections. They found that the majority of the newscasts at these stations did not contain a single campaign story.

Of those that did, the average story was 89 seconds long. Most stories that were broadcast just focused on who was ahead in the election. A clear link was found between stations owned by media chains and the absence of local election information.

The situation is even worse in radio, where thousands of stations in the U.S. are owned by a single company which has few if any ties to local communities.

It is assumed -- generally by newscast consultants hired by the stations -- that election news does not help ratings. At the same time, political advertising is a major source of revenue for the stations.

At the same time we need to put some things into perspective.

For many years TV has represented the number one source of news and information for the vast majority of people in industrialized nations.

During times of national crisis, such as the September 2001, terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, the nation and the world immediately turned to television for information. The dramatic and moving television images during this time brought a nation together in shared grief and outrage.

On September 21, 2002, almost all of the U.S. networks devoted two hours of commercial-free programming to a telethon to raise money for the 9/11 victims. The same type of commercial-free coverage took place in March, 2003, when the networks covered their first war "live" — the invasion of Iraq.

When a scandal is uncovered on "60 Minutes," "Dateline," or a similar U.S. news show, we often see action taken.

When the spotlight of TV scrutiny is focused on a problem in a distant land, and there is public outrage, we often see steps taken to correct things. This is the reason that third-world despots fear, and have taken great measures to ban, the press, in general, the TV news in particular.

Does not the fear of exposure keep many on a nobler path?

Often the news isn't pleasant. As the bearer of some unpopular messages TV news has generated many critics.  In fact, TV news probably gets more complaints than any other type of programming, especially from those who want to believe "a different truth."

Many longtime professionals remember a time when newspapers and electronic journalism were held in much higher esteem — primarily because there was a "high wall" separating news departments and bottom-line corporate interests.

It appears that the drop in credibility has impacted where people are getting their news.

Note in the graph below that among college-age students the Internet is now the primary source of news. More than one person in this age group has explained that they can simply get the information faster from the Internet—and without all the commercial clutter.

Note that in the graph below that newspapers are in last place.

Although this graph doesn't represent the general population, it may suggest the beginning of a trend. (See also youth and media use.)

The blog article, The Debasement of TV News, has more information on this issue.