Web trumps TV for news in new survey
Cory Bergman March 4th, 2008
Updated: Nearly half (48%) of respondents in a new survey from We Media and Zogby International — internet users who took an online survey — say the internet is their primary news source, up from 40% just a year ago. Only 29% said TV is their primary news source, with radio at 11% and newspapers at 10%. Of course, younger users are even more internet-centric: 55% of people 18-29 say the internet is their primary news source. The study also found that the internet (32%) even beat TV (21%) and newspapers (22%) for the most trustworthy source of news.
While these numbers are skewed in favor of the internet because of the survey’s methodology (see more below), this is worth a hard look: 67% believe traditional journalism is out of of touch with what Americans want from their news. “For the second year in a row we have documented a crisis in American journalism that is far more serious than the industry’s business challenges — or maybe a consequence of them,” said Andrew Nachison, co-founder of iFOCOS. “While the U.S. news industry sheds expenses and frets about its future, Americans are dismayed by its present. Meanwhile, we see clearly the generational shift of digital natives from traditional to online news — so the challenge for traditional news companies is complex. They need to invest in new products and services - and they have. But they’ve also got to invest in quality, influence and impact. They need to invest in journalism that makes a difference in people’s lives.”
It boils down to one word: relevancy. The internet, by definition, is more relevant because you can self-select what you want to read and watch. But I think the tendency for local and cable TV news to focus on lowest-common-denominator coverage (urgent crime, breathless disaster, amazing anti-aging face cream, danger lurking to kill your children and your dog, too!) is accelerating the transition from television to the web for news.
Adds Aaron in comments: “I’m shocked, shocked to learn that internet users prefer to get their news on the internet! This is just as useless as the Magid-HA survey from last week. Zogby controlled for age/race/region, etc., but didn’t control for internet usage habits, so we have no idea if these respondents spend more or less time online than the average American. I will ask this — how many infrequent/occasional internet users do you know who will voluntarily take time to fill out internet surveys?”
11 Comments Add your own
1. Aaron | March 4th, 2008 at 2:53 pm
Stop me if this sounds familiar: What a crock of shit.
“Zogby International was commissioned by [WE Media] to conduct an online survey of [1979 adults].”
I’m shocked, shocked to learn that internet users prefer to get their news on the internet!
This is just as useless as the Magid-HA survey from last week. Zogby controlled for age/race/region, etc., but didn’t control for internet usage habits, so we have no idea if these respondents spend more or less time online than the average American.
I will ask this — how many infrequent/occasional internet users do you know who will voluntarily take time to fill out internet surveys?
I hope someone will start conducting some real research on how Americans’ news consumption habits are changing… but this certainly isn’t it.
2. Cory | March 4th, 2008 at 3:17 pm
Excellent point. We should put you to work as our research debunker. I updated a couple things to clarify in the orignal post.
3. Nick | March 4th, 2008 at 3:43 pm
Well, considering that most of the adult population is online at some point (and more and more frequently), this is probably a better sample than if it were offline.
If you work in the newspaper or television business, ignore and dismiss this at your peril. Just ask any “real” person you know how often they REALLY read the paper or watch the 6 or 11 o’clock news.
4. Kaan | March 4th, 2008 at 6:05 pm
Whether surveyed by phone or online or in-person, the trend is clear and rather uncontroversial - more Internet users are consuming more news online.
This is what Pew Internet’s tracking research has been showing for a couple of years now, along with those of many others. This doesn’t mean traditional sources are irrelevant but surely there is competition.
Online video boom and social media are obvious drivers. Two years ago, your only choice was to read tiny, dense text and online news was more of a ‘news junkie’ habit. Now one click gets you streaming video. And, it’s easy to go viral with links via social media or email.
5. Z | March 4th, 2008 at 6:07 pm
“But I think the tendency for local and cable TV news to focus on lowest-common-denominator coverage (urgent crime, breathless disaster, amazing anti-aging face cream, danger lurking to kill your children and your dog, too!) is accelerating the transition from television to the web for news.”
If this is true, why are these crime, death and sensational stories getting the highest pageviews?
6. Contrarian | March 4th, 2008 at 6:18 pm
In my informal survey of NON-internet users, a surprising 100% said the do NOT get their news from the internet.
Duh.
7. Cory | March 4th, 2008 at 6:32 pm
@ Z: Those stories, in written form, are much less sensational than when they’re delivered on TV. No teasing. No anchor voice. Just the story.
And again, TV forces everything on you because it’s a linear medium. Online, you can choose to click if you want. And you can choose just the read the first line or two if you want.
8. Dan | March 4th, 2008 at 10:47 pm
TV news not relevant? Astounding.
Not making a difference in peoples lives?
You can’t be serious?
You’d think you worked in a building where Dorothy Bullitt used to roam the halls. Too bad we do not have any more Dorothy Bullits roaming TV station and newspaper hallways anymore, or Marty Haags either.
Maybe they’re out there but can’t cut through all the
bullshit anymore.
Maybe the place for good people isn’t within the
confines of broadcast and media organizations anymore. Maybe those talented people need to
strike out on their own and challenge the leaders.
The barrier to entry no longer includes a transmitter and tower or a printing press and trucks.
Dan
9. Aaron | March 4th, 2008 at 11:31 pm
Kaan’s point is a good one — as long as the methodology stays the same, the trend being revealed is valid.
People will continue to find the web more relevant than TV because it’s non-linear by nature. I can drill as deep as I want on what I find interesting, and skim the stuff I don’t.
I think that if TV focuses on competing with the web for pure relevancy, TV loses. The trick is figuring out how to turn the broadcast product into one that complements the interactive prodcut. Create a feedback loop with your audience/contributors — the best and most relevant stuff from the web bubbles up into the newscasts, and the most compelling material from the newscasts is a launching point for deeper material online.
Making something relevant is not the same as making it compelling. TV can concede relevancy to the web but still make the product compelling — we just have to give up on the one-way mindset we’ve worked under for the last 40 years.
10. tdc | March 5th, 2008 at 8:51 am
the mere idea that the 15 year-old upstart is giving the 50 year-old institution the run of its life is proof positive that tv execs. either get off their duff or suffer the same fate as their print brethren.
but, denial is a tough thing to overcome… especially when you can gin up a study that favors your pov.
11. tdc | March 5th, 2008 at 10:39 am
after two attempts to post a link to the five year chart of McClatchy (symbol: MNI) over at yahoo! finance as an illustration to my above comment and the spam filter eating the submission, i’ll leave it to the user to get it themself.
sure, papers aren’t going away tomorrow, but the business model of the last 100 years is fubar.
check out that CHART!
Leave a Comment
(Please keep URLs out of the comment body or the spam filter will block you.)Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed