MyDD :: 10% Read Blogs Every Day

10% Read Blogs Every Day

by Chris Bowers, Tue Jun 14, 2005 at 05:32:57 PM EST

Here's another small bit of info in my ongoing project to understand traffic patterns in the political blogosphere. From Annenberg:

Eighty-one percent of journalists said that bloggers who comment on the news media are not journalists or are journalists to a small extent. Yet, 45 percent of journalists said that bloggers have a positive impact on the quality of news that the public receives, 38 percent said that bloggers have a negative effect, and 12 percent said no effect

Roughly half of journalists, 51 percent, said that the emergence of blogs has made journalists more accountable, 3 percent said less accountable, and 44 percent of journalists said that blogs have not made much of a difference. Similarly, 43 percent of the public said that blogs have made journalists more accountable, 5 percent said less, and 46 percent said that blogs have not made much of a difference. Twenty percent of journalists reported reading a blog almost every day compared to 10 percent of the public.

The survey of journalists was conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates International between March 7 and May 2, 2005, among 673 journalists including owners and executives, editors and producers, and staff journalists, and representing both print and broadcast media, and local and national organizations. Interviews were conducted online and by telephone by Princeton Data Source. For results based on the total sample, one can say with 95% confidence that the error attributable to sampling is plus or minus 4 percentage points.

The public survey was conducted by telephone between March 3 and April 5, 2005, among a nationwide representative sample of 1500 adults 18 years of age and older. For results based on the total sample, one can say with 95 percent confidence that the error attributable to sampling is plus or minus 3 percentage points.

10% of the public isn't bad. Maybe half of that traffic goes to political blogs. This certainly seems to support my hypothesis that blogs have surpassed cable news channels as a source of news for Americans under the age of 55.

The press release for this poll also should be nominated for the "intentionally misreading your own data" award:

About as many Americans consider Rush Limbaugh, the conservative radio talk show star, to be a journalist as say the same of Bob Woodward, the Washington Post's assistant managing editor who broke the Watergate story with Carl Bernstein, according to a national survey conducted for the University of Pennsylvania's Annenberg Public Policy Center.

Twenty-seven percent of adult Americans polled between March 7 and May 2, 2005, said Limbaugh was a journalist, 55 percent said he was not, and 18 percent said they did not know. For Woodward, 30 percent said he was a journalist, 17 percent said he was not and 53 percent did not know. The difference was within the poll's margin of sampling error.

Limbaugh's name ID is at 82% in this poll, while Woodward's is at 47%, entirely accounting for the similarity this poll supposedly finds. By a two to one margin, people who know who Rush Limbaugh is do not think he is a journalist. Also, by nearly a two to one margin, people who know who Bob Woodward is think he is a journalist. Way to not sensationalize your own results Annenberg. Trying to grab headlines is the lowest form of polling.

Tags: Blogosphere (all tags)

Permalink :: 10 Comments :: Post a Comment

Grab that stash with both hands (none / 0)

and make a stack!

by turnerbroadcasting on Tue Jun 14, 2005 at 06:34:40 PM EST

Talk Radio actually has zero penetration (none / 0)

Its a lousy medium. People tune in for emotional
noise in their lives, but it never works.

I've found that if you're on the freeway, you're bored, or you're angry or something - or you
just want to drown out voices in your head,
or whatever it takes you to want to turn
on an AM RADIO station and listen to a failed
entertainer...

Well if you can keep in mind that scene from
David Lynch's "Blue Velvet" where you had
this guy who has this kind of underground
dive, some guy named "Frank" who sings
into this glowing radio microphone...

Thats where you'll be going, you know?
Into that creepy little room with them.
It makes you to be just like them.

About the only guy I'll do that with,
is either Bruce Williams (where are you bruce,
we want you down here in Atlanta!) or
Clark Howard ... but only because the room
there is so creepily lit because they're
taking you into a bank vault. Clark
and Bruce never failed at anything.

Hey -- what do you classify Clark Howard, as?
A journalist? The guy can find a deal if its
hidden offshore from Aruba. I call that investigative +something+...?

by turnerbroadcasting on Tue Jun 14, 2005 at 06:44:51 PM EST

Interesting (none / 0)

I think Annenberg's poll shows that between 38% and 44% of so called journalists don't have a clue. That would probably also be a low estimate of how many so called journalists are M$M hacks.

I'm trying to figure out why Annenberg has a good reputation. This is just the latest example of Annenberg being good at polling, and just as good at spinning their results.

by Gary Boatwright on Tue Jun 14, 2005 at 07:36:38 PM EST

It Gets Even Better! (none / 0)

The AP continued this travesty. From their story carried on Editor & Publisher's site:

Limbaugh said Monday he was "not really surprised'' by the results showing a quarter of Americans would describe him as a journalist. The conservative talk show host said, "I am America's anchorman, doing news play-by-play 15 hours a week for nearly 17 years now, and this is just more evidence that the old media's monopoly-like dominance is finished.''

Let's see, how many times has Limbaugh responded to criticisms of his legendary inaccuracy by saying he's "an entertainer" not a journalist?

Oh... nevermind. It was just the drugs talking, don'tcha know!

by Paul Rosenberg on Tue Jun 14, 2005 at 11:18:35 PM EST

Re: It Gets Even Better! (none / 0)

Its not vulgar, paul, its perverse.

by turnerbroadcasting on Wed Jun 15, 2005 at 12:07:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It Gets Even Better! (none / 0)

PS the really funny part was when he was on his
arse in Sactown buying cheap products from
the mini mart with his credit card to eat,
suckling on welfare and unemployment payouts -
it was right about then he realized he could
turn on a whole class of people if he started
doing news-media-entertainment for people who
are miffed at supporting losers like himself...

Morbidly obese, tiny pecker, no wonder he
does so much drugs. He's probably gay.

by turnerbroadcasting on Wed Jun 15, 2005 at 12:09:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

this just in (3.00 / 1)

Nationally more people consider Jon Stewart a real journalist(3%) than Erica Rodefer (<<1%), local reporter for the Tennessean..

its by more than a 100:1 margin.

ergo, the public think jon stewart is a real journalist!

by srolle on Wed Jun 15, 2005 at 12:21:16 AM EST

News? (none / 0)

Given the state of the news in the United States, how would a majority of the public have any idea of what real journalism looks like? If there is any news on television it must be on a premium cable channel that isn't offered where I live. Radio is no better, give or take a few programs from European broadcasters. The major papers are shadows of their former selves, aping the worst of cable in a vain attempt to boost circulation.

The reason for all of this is the corporate control of the media, its ideological bias, right-wing, and its demand that everything make an unresonable level of profit. Even without the ideological bias the last one would ensure the death of real news. Lies and gossip sell, the news has always been done on a pro-bono basis. In 2005, in the United States everything is driven by what will return the maximum level of profit.

What happens when it turns out that those things essential for democracy, an informed electorate, a majority of people having a sense of the common good and for posterity don't generate the maximum level of profit? It's an important question because we already know that they don't.

by EnochW on Wed Jun 15, 2005 at 05:42:41 AM EST

The irony (none / 0)

is that I don't think that Rush Limbaugh even considers himself a jounalist. In interviews, he presents himself as an entertainer. I would dispute that description too, but it's closer to the truth than journalist.

by alhill on Wed Jun 15, 2005 at 10:40:29 AM EST

They have it both ways (none / 0)

They have it both ways, if they like what's going on they call it journalism but when exactly the same people lie, smear, and act like idiots they are put in the entertainment bin. The journalistic profession certainly cuts itself a lot more slack than they do politicians. Make that Democratic politicians. Republicans are sacrosanct, ceasar's wife AND political prostitutes at the same time.

by EnochW on Wed Jun 15, 2005 at 12:40:06 PM EST

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.