What do you think?
Rate this book
Why Americans Hate the Media and How It Matters
As recently as the early 1970s, the news media was one of the most respected institutions in the United States. Yet by the 1990s, this trust had all but evaporated. Why has confidence in the press declined so dramatically over the past 40 years? And has this change shaped the public's political behavior? This book examines waning public trust in the institutional news media within the context of the American political system and looks at how this lack of confidence has altered the ways people acquire political information and form electoral preferences.
Jonathan Ladd argues that in the 1950s, '60s, and early '70s, competition in American party politics and the media industry reached historic lows. When competition later intensified in both of these realms, the public's distrust of the institutional media grew, leading the public to resist the mainstream press's information about policy outcomes and turn toward alternative partisan media outlets. As a result, public beliefs and voting behavior are now increasingly shaped by partisan predispositions. Ladd contends that it is not realistic or desirable to suppress party and media competition to the levels of the mid-twentieth century; rather, in the contemporary media environment, new ways to augment the public's knowledgeability and responsiveness must be explored.
Drawing on historical evidence, experiments, and public opinion surveys, this book shows that in a world of endless news sources, citizens' trust in institutional media is more important than ever before.
Jonathan Ladd argues that in the 1950s, '60s, and early '70s, competition in American party politics and the media industry reached historic lows. When competition later intensified in both of these realms, the public's distrust of the institutional media grew, leading the public to resist the mainstream press's information about policy outcomes and turn toward alternative partisan media outlets. As a result, public beliefs and voting behavior are now increasingly shaped by partisan predispositions. Ladd contends that it is not realistic or desirable to suppress party and media competition to the levels of the mid-twentieth century; rather, in the contemporary media environment, new ways to augment the public's knowledgeability and responsiveness must be explored.
Drawing on historical evidence, experiments, and public opinion surveys, this book shows that in a world of endless news sources, citizens' trust in institutional media is more important than ever before.
288 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2011
5 people are currently reading
87 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
October 14, 2024
Public perception can be wrong
In America, bashing mainstream media is such a common practices from both politicians and "alternative media". The low public trust in media is a very important aspect of political background of 2016 election. The rise of extreme populist candidates in right and left can be mostly attributed to the hostility to the political establishment, of which the mainstream media is a part.
The book is a summary of 1. empirical and anecdotal evidences of the declining public trust in media over time, 2. the reasons of the decline, and 3. the consequences of the decline. Before diving into the main theme, the author spent first two chapters to set up the context of the decline by giving an account of the status of American media in nineteen century, the rise of journalism in a progressive era of 1920s, and its culminating influences in 1960s and 1970s.
Then comes the decline. The evidences part is well documented and explained in the book. Multiple polls from respected independent polling survey are cited. There is also a chronological depiction of how presidents and politicians in general treated media.
However, the reasoning part is not all that convincing. Two reasons are cited for the declining public trust in media: political polarization and the more competitive media industry. The political polarization itself is a fuzz term and requires further clarification. Is it the polarization in politicians' partisan behaviors, policy orientations, or electoral behaviors, as different kinds of polarization can have different consequences for the media. The author focused on politicians' polarization most of the time, and the narratives are mostly about the how politicians increase attack on the media. The link between electoral polarization and the low trust in media is left unexplored, an aspect I believe is as important as, if not more than, politicians polarization.
On the second reason, a more competitive media industry, the author relied mostly on narratives to develop the underlying logic: talk radio shows on the right, internet blog on the left took away the monopolistic power of mainstream media on news and information; the success of FOX news' combatant partisan style push other news organization to be more partisan. Therefore mainstream media is under attack from alternative media for its alleged "bias", in the same time has to sacrifice its impartiality further to cater to the viewers to gain market share. As a sound logic as it appears, the narrative lacks hard evidence to support it. Other researches have pointed to the evidences of sustained centralist stances from mainstream media, such as CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC based on the content analysis, and come to the conclusion that mainstream media bias is mostly political rhetoric and a wrong perception held by the public.
Overall the book did good job analyzing the phenomenon of the declining public trust in media, despite some of his argument can be further developed and improved.
In America, bashing mainstream media is such a common practices from both politicians and "alternative media". The low public trust in media is a very important aspect of political background of 2016 election. The rise of extreme populist candidates in right and left can be mostly attributed to the hostility to the political establishment, of which the mainstream media is a part.
The book is a summary of 1. empirical and anecdotal evidences of the declining public trust in media over time, 2. the reasons of the decline, and 3. the consequences of the decline. Before diving into the main theme, the author spent first two chapters to set up the context of the decline by giving an account of the status of American media in nineteen century, the rise of journalism in a progressive era of 1920s, and its culminating influences in 1960s and 1970s.
Then comes the decline. The evidences part is well documented and explained in the book. Multiple polls from respected independent polling survey are cited. There is also a chronological depiction of how presidents and politicians in general treated media.
However, the reasoning part is not all that convincing. Two reasons are cited for the declining public trust in media: political polarization and the more competitive media industry. The political polarization itself is a fuzz term and requires further clarification. Is it the polarization in politicians' partisan behaviors, policy orientations, or electoral behaviors, as different kinds of polarization can have different consequences for the media. The author focused on politicians' polarization most of the time, and the narratives are mostly about the how politicians increase attack on the media. The link between electoral polarization and the low trust in media is left unexplored, an aspect I believe is as important as, if not more than, politicians polarization.
On the second reason, a more competitive media industry, the author relied mostly on narratives to develop the underlying logic: talk radio shows on the right, internet blog on the left took away the monopolistic power of mainstream media on news and information; the success of FOX news' combatant partisan style push other news organization to be more partisan. Therefore mainstream media is under attack from alternative media for its alleged "bias", in the same time has to sacrifice its impartiality further to cater to the viewers to gain market share. As a sound logic as it appears, the narrative lacks hard evidence to support it. Other researches have pointed to the evidences of sustained centralist stances from mainstream media, such as CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC based on the content analysis, and come to the conclusion that mainstream media bias is mostly political rhetoric and a wrong perception held by the public.
Overall the book did good job analyzing the phenomenon of the declining public trust in media, despite some of his argument can be further developed and improved.
December 5, 2019
Really changed my view on how the media has evolved throughout history and what the future may look like.
December 25, 2011
Boring, non-controversial, repetitive
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews