Mainstream media no longer report facts - they report opinions

Question

A lot of people believe the news today feels more like opinion that straight facts, and research actually backs that up. The RAND Corporation talks about this idea called “truth decay”, which basically means facts and options are starting to blur together in the media. The study points out how news outlets now mix more commentary and emotional takes into their reporting instead of just presenting information. According to RAND, this shift has made people argue more about what’s true and what’s not, and it’s also lowered trust in the media overall. So while not every outlet is biased, it’s clear that factual and neutral reporting is becoming harder to find.

This connects to how people feel about the news in general. A Gallup poll found that only 28% of Americans say they trust media to report news fairly and accurately. I would say that number says a lot about how skeptical people have become. Interestingly smaller news outlets tend to be trusted more than big national ones and that is probably because they stick to community stories and less option heavy content. So while it might be an exaggeration to say mainstream media never report facts, there is definitely truth behind the claim that opinions now dominate how stories get told.  

Answer 1

The claim itself of saying the media no longer reports facts but only opinions, is most definitely exaggerated, but it wouldn't be exaggerating to say that trust in the media has steadily gone down hill. According to Pew Charitable Trusts, distrust in the media has lessen thanks to things like the polarizing of politics, news companies increasing the number of ads in their stories, and the teaching of critical thinking when it comes to finding credible sources. The Annenberg School for Communication also had similar things to say, but they also included how news outlets have been relying more on sensational news for more money and viewership. They also said that distrust in the government seems to also leave people with a bigger distrust in the media.

https://www.pew.org/en/trend/archive/fall-2024/media-mistrust-has-been-growing-for-decades-does-it-matter

https://www.asc.upenn.edu/research/centers/milton-wolf-seminar-media-and-diplomacy-24

Answer 2

The claim put forth by Janiya is an inaccurate description of the claim being made by the article he or she linked. I believe its claim is better described by the article's opening statement: "Over the past two decades, national political and civil discourse in the United States has been characterized by 'Truth Decay,' defined as a set of four interrelated trends: an increasing disagreement about facts and analytical interpretations of facts and data; a blurring of the line between opinion and fact; an increase in the relative volume, and resulting influence, of opinion and personal experience over fact; and lowered trust in formerly respected sources of factual information." This article has not one claim, but four, each deserving of its own fact-check.

1. There is an increasing disagreement about facts and analytical interpretations of facts and data.
The Pew Research Center has found that around 60% of the American population believes that we disagree on basic facts. This is supplemented by current popular political issues, such as Yale's polling showing disagreement on the existence or severity of climate change or Pew Research Center's poll on whether gender is equivalent to sex assigned at birth.

2. There is a blurring of the line between opinion and fact.

A Harvard study has found that 45.7% of Americans cannot differentiate between opinion and fact. A Pew Research Center poll has also found that, although different variables such as political awareness and digital savviness may vary the result, 26% of US adults are capable of differentiating opinion from fact 100% correctly of the 5 questions presented.

3. There is an increase in the relative volume, and resulting influence, of opinion and personal experience over fact.

The aforementioned poll also shows that political orientation biases their views on what counts as opinion and fact, depending on whether a statement appeals to their side. The existence of confirmation bias is also heavily studied and has an abundance of evidence backing up its existence, such as in Kandeers et al.'s scientific paper.

4. There is lowered trust in formerly respected sources of factual information.

As shown in the Gallup poll Janiya mentioned, only 28% of Americans trust the media to report the news in an objective manner.

Thus, all four claims are true.

Answer 3

This statement is widely true. There is growing evidence that mainstream media increasingly blends facts with opinions, rather than strictly reporting objective information. For example, a 2018 study by the Pew Research Center found that sizable portions of Americans misclassified statements: many could not reliably distinguish factual statements from opinion statements. Similarly, the American Press Institute reported that 42 % of Americans believe much of the news they see is “opinion and commentary posing as news reporting,” while only a third felt the coverage struck the right balance between fact and analysis.

More broadly, the term “truth decay” has been used to describe how the volume and influence of opinion in public discourse has risen, while the role of objective facts and analysis has diminished. Additionally, a survey by the Gallup Organization in collaboration with the Knight Foundation found that 62 % of U.S. adults believed the news they consumed was biased and 44 % believed it was inaccurate.

Together, these findings suggest that the media landscape faces a meaningful shift: rather than clear-cut fact-based reporting followed by separate commentary, many outlets are increasingly mixing interpretation, opinion and fact within “news” articles. This blurring of boundaries makes it harder for audiences to discern what is verifiable fact and what is interpretive or subjective.

Answer 4

This is more of an opinion than a fact. Our media exists in a free-market setting. Anyone can create a news organization and become a semi credible source as long as someone is listening to them. There is a case to be made that news has become more sensationalized, like this study by West Virginia University. They found significant evidence of sensationalism in every level of news media, which may be the result of our free market setting. When news becomes entertainment, you have to compete for attention. But sensational does not necessarily mean factually incorrect. Your source, the Rand corporation, seems to suggest we go through cycles of "truth decay" and that by their own logic we will soon shift back to more "fact-based media". The Gallup poll you listed was conducted on a small control group, and it can't be assumed that their group opinion is indicative of the entire United States. The question of "trust in media" is also greatly affected by the media you consume. If the opinion of your favorite broadcaster is that every other network only shares opinions, then they must be the only person still reporting the facts, and all their listeners will have that much less trust in the media as a whole. 

Answer 5

This user is claiming that the partisanship of media is no longer, and all media outlets post biased information. While politics have become wildly polarized in recent years, let's take a deeper dive into the "parties" behind the posting. The user draws their claim from a source called Rand.Org, which is known for posting research reports. After doing a deeper dive, I found that they are a reliable source that is known for posting unbiased media information. They have a positive reputation among news outlets for producing truthful reports. This means that their claim of unbiased media declining may have some truth to it.

To look for better coverage on the topic, I went to another source for deeper information. I was able to find a report from the Pew Research Center discussing media bias. The article does a wide, deep dive into everything news-related, and how Americans view each party and the information they produce. Their ultimate conclusion was that the definition of unbiased media has changed in recent years, and it depends on how citizens view certain media outlets and how they align with their political beliefs. They stated that "Our surveys regularly ask Americans how closely they are following the news, where they get their news, and how much they trust the news they see," (Pew Research Center, 1). The term "journalist perspective" is also used in the article, and they discuss how a differing perspective can truly alter media perception. However, the majority of news articles do try their best to produce unbiased reports and fact-check their sources.

Speaking of fact-checking, it is always important to check your sources to see that you are making a claim based on a reliable source. It seems that the Pew Research Center is drawing some of its data from Sage Journals. According to the Google AI Overview, Sage Journals is "a large independent academic publisher with a strong focus on the social sciences and humanities, publishing over 1,100 peer-reviewed journals across a wide range of subjects like business, law, and medicine." (Google). Sourcing information that will be used in a news site from a peer-reviewed journal is a strong way to ensure you are making highly educated and unbiased claims.

While it is a scary time in this current political climate, the claim that the user made in saying that unbiased media is now dead is false. Some outlets may produce political propaganda, some may produce slightly biased articles, and some may produce 100% unbiased information. It is always best to do your own research, however, and look further into the sources to make sure you are consuming as much unbiased information as possible. Then you can make the best educated opinion based on true facts

Answer 6

This week, I am determining the credibility of the claim that “mainstream media no longer report facts; they report opinions”. This piece was written by Janiya Conerly, who has been on News Detective for five days. I was unable to fully research the person who made this post, as their name did not appear on LinkedIn or any Google search results. She has written four claims on News Detective and has the status of newbie, and has received a mix of both upvotes and downvotes. She has not written any other pieces about this topic, which illustrates that she is not an expert in this field. This claim lacks credibility with the author, but she helped build it back by using a credible source. I believe that if she used an additional source, it would really boost her credibility. 

The claim that mainstream media “no longer report facts” is a very extreme opinion, because there are many credible sources that report factual pieces. With my own research, I was able to find that this claim is inaccurate, and the idea that the media only shares opinions is an opinion. Think of any media-sourced news report regarding national disasters; those are not opinions, they are real-life disasters. After looking into several credible outlets, such as Reuters and many other sites that conduct extensive fact-checks to ensure their credibility and transparency. “Reuters News has a fact-checking unit within its editorial department. The principal aim of this unit is to fact-check visual material and claims posted on social media” (Reuters). The claim comes from their own action plans; there is no source. This counters the claim and reassures us that many news sites are taking the necessary steps to broadcast accurate news. 

I think that this claim should be reshaped and possibly focus on the increase in people's inability to differentiate what is real and what is fake. We see news every day, whether it is on the TV, news sites, in papers, or on social media. When it comes to news on social media, the sites can't block out all fake opinion news pieces. This is because sites can't flag all false information, and the argument is that it would limit people's freedom of speech. There are some fake opinion pieces that are aimed at fooling people, and they make it extremely difficult for people to tell the difference. Pew Research Center created a project testing people’s ability to spot the differences between opinions and factual pieces, “The main portion of the study, which measured the public’s ability to distinguish between five factual statements and five opinion statements, found that a majority of Americans correctly identified at least three of the five statements in each set” (Pew Research Center). This demonstrates that there are still facts being broadcast, but there are also intentionally opinion-based pieces that may have the intention of tricking people. This line comes directly from their research, and there is no other source. Some people post misinformation out of emotions or what they may believe is true, and this can explain why the media has been shifting away from the truth.  

I have found it very hard to differentiate between opinions and factual pieces. One example is during the 2024 election, I saw many pieces disregarding both candidates, and after close observations, I was able to see they were false claims and opinions. People must become more educated on how to determine what is a fact and what isn’t. Some of the key steps of this are looking more in-depth at different posts and seeing if the source is credible, and what the post is actually implying. Another action is looking at the wording and seeing if it is directly favoring one side of the argument. 

Overall, I believe that the media has strayed from the truth, and it can be difficult to spot accuracy and credibility. However, it is impossible to claim that the media strictly produce opinions. 

https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/2018/06/18/distinguishing-between-factual-and-opinion-statements-in-the-news/?utm_source=chatgpt.com 

https://www.reuters.com/fact-check/about/?utm_source=chatgpt.com