The Online Credibility Gap

The Donald W. Reynolds Journalism Institute along with the Associated Press Managing Editors have produced a report about the credibility of online, local journalism.


The news release says the research is based on 500 interviews with randomly selected adults (18 or older) and 1,251 newsroom editors of U.S. dailies. The purpose of the interview surveys was "to examine opinions of the general public as well as newsroom editors regarding the credibility of online local news content, interaction between newsroom and readers, and the attributes that comprise good journalism practice online."

Some of the topics questioned and explored included anonymous postings, "editing for civility," and journalists' transparency in relation to their personal views. The consensus was that local online news should follow standard journalistic practices like verifying information, but there was division over users posting anonymous comments.

Not surprisingly, verifying information, getting the facts right and correcting mistakes ranked highly in importance for both editors and the public. Both groups also felt that journalists and the public are responsible for accuracy of local news.

What seems more unusual is that editors and the public trust the news to the same extent; 74 percent of editors trusted online content, and 75 percent of the public trusted the information. The primarily disagreement regarded anonymous comments, with 64 percent of editors thinking it a bad idea and only 45 percent of the public.

What I find most odd in the report summary is the number of editors who trust print newspapers more than their online versions. Though 74 percent of editors and 75 percent of the public were indifferent as to one being more trustworthy, a full 24 percent of editors trusted newspapers more than associated Web sites.

I know people are sometimes reluctant to accept change, but I fail to see why such a substantial percentage would disparage the credibility of online news content. I'm no expert when it comes to newspapers' Web sites, but I would think much of the content is quite similar, if not a carbon copy, of what appears in the print edition. Shouldn't these editors have greater faith in what it is they are publishing?

The study does not seem to be a particularly large one. However, consider that that are somewhat more than 1,500 newspapers affiliated with The Associated Press; the editors interviewed for the study represent much of this number.

I know this is a difficult time for the world of journalism, but perhaps this report will prove to be a bit of a swift kick to the industry in order to get it back on track. When even people on the inside fail to trust what they produce, it is a sad state indeed.