Survey Report Victoria Advocate Journalism Credibility Survey The Victoria Advocate Associated Press Managing Editors

Transcription

1 Introduction Survey Report 2009 Victoria Advocate Journalism Credibility Survey The Victoria Advocate Associated Press Managing Editors The Donald W. Reynolds Journalism Institute Center for Advanced Social Research School of Journalism University of Missouri-Columbia September 2009 As part of the APME Online Journalism Credibility Project, the Victoria (Texas) Advocate wanted to understand how audiences in today s new media environment perceive the credibility of newsroom-generated content and user-generated content. Teaming up with the University of Houston - Victoria and the Center for Advanced Social Research (CASR) of Missouri's School of Journalism, The Advocate conducted 400 interviews with adults 18 years of age or older in Victoria County in June and September The APME Online Journalism Credibility Project was led by Advocate Editor Chris Cobler. More specifically, the study attempted to learn: If there is a credibility gap between newsroom-generated content and user-generated content; What content do online readers find more credible or less credible? Does the credibility of one form of content affect the credibility of another? Survey Instrument The survey questionnaire was developed jointly by Chris Cobler at The Victoria Advocate; journalism professor Macarena Hernandez at the University of Houston - Victoria; and Ken Fleming, director of the Center for Advanced Social Research. Its purpose was to collect the following information: -1-

2 Primary source of information about the local community Readership of The Victoria Advocate Access to the Internet & use of online media Viewership of Credibility of The Victoria Advocate and its features Credibility of Other credibility issues Demographics Sampling Methodology The 2009 Victoria Advocate Journalism Credibility Survey was based on a random digit dialing (RDD) sample of residential telephone numbers of Victoria County, Texas. All eligible respondents were adults 18 years of age or older and the local residents. The random aspect of the sample was used to avoid response bias and to provide representation of both listed and unlisted numbers (including not-yet-listed). The design of the sample ensured this representation by random generation of the last two digits of telephone numbers selected on the basis of valid area code and telephone exchanges. Respondent Selection Method Two respondent selection methods were used during the entire data collection. Under the leadership of Professor Macarena Hernandez, a group of students from the University of Houston-Victoria used the most-recent-birthday method for random selection of respondents because of lack of a computer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) system. In so doing, the students asked for those who had had the most recent birthday in households where there were more than one adult. With its CATI system, the staff of CASR used the Troldahl-Carter-Bryant (T-C-B) respondent selection method. Specifically, interviewers asked two questions shortly after the introductory statement, How many adults aged 18 or over live in your household, including yourself? and How many of them are women / men? Based on the answers to the two questions, the interviewer will then select the designated respondents using one of eight different versions of a selection matrix that appears on the computer screen at random. In so doing, a proper balance of males and females, younger and older adults in a household can be reached. The likelihood of within-sampling-unit non-coverage error is minimized because all eligible respondents in a household are equally considered by the selection method. At least eight attempts were made to complete an interview at every sampled telephone number. The calls were scheduled over days of the week to maximize the chances of making a contact with a potential respondent. All refusals were recontacted at least once in order to attempt to convert them to completed interviews. -2-

3 Field Operation Four hundred (400) interviews were completed via telephone by both the students of University of Houston-Victoria and the staff of the Center for Advanced Social Research of University of Missouri s School of Journalism in June and September Survey Findings The following report summarizes findings of the survey based on 400 interviews completed with residents that lived in Victoria County, Texas, in June and September Primary source of information about local community First, respondents were asked their primary source of information about their local community. As shown in Table 1, nearly 58% chose The Victoria Advocate, suggesting the dominant position of the newspaper as the primary source in the local media. In addition, 28% of respondents relied on local television for news about their community. TABLE 1: Primary Source of information about what is happening in your local community? Description of sources Percent (%) The Victoria Advocate 57.5 Local television 28.3 Radio 1.3 Magazine n.a. VictoriaAdvocate.com 3.0 Other Web sites 3.3 Friends/Relatives 3.0 Co-Workers 0.8 Others specify 1.3 Don t know/not sure 1.3 Refused 0.5 n =

4 Readership of The Victoria Advocate How many days in a week do you read The Victoria Advocate? [n = 378] The strong position of The Victoria Advocate in the local media was also evident as 59% of the people surveyed in Victoria, Texas, read the newspaper seven days in a week. Including those who either did not know or refused to answer the question, 82% of respondents read it ranging from one day to seven days in a week. Those who did not read The Advocate were then asked why they did not. Of the 62 respondents, 12% preferred news online, 12% thought the paper was either too liberal or biased, 15% said they did not have time, and another 12% cited health conditions. Access to and usage of the Internet According to the survey, 77% of the respondents had access to the Internet at home. This finding is consistent with research findings of the community newspaper readership study conducted by the National Newspaper Association in 2005, 2007, 2008, and

5 Do you have access to the Internet at home or at work? [n = 400] Those who had Internet access were asked if they would regularly visit a list of Web sites for news and information. Table 2 displays their responses. Table 2: Web sites for news and information Description of Web sites Percent (%) CNN.com 16.6 Yahoo news 38.1 Google news 16.3 The New York Times 4.6 Other Web sites 3.0 How trustworthy do you find the contents on these news sites? [n = 226] -5-

6 Next, respondents were asked a list of Web sites that they would regularly visit for social networking. Table 3: Web sites for social networking Description of Web sites Percent (%) Facebook.30.3 MySpace 16.0 YouTube 14.7 Twitter 6.5 Other Web sites 4.2 How trustworthy do you find the contents on these social networking sites? [n = 126] -6-

7 Viewership of Have you ever visited VictoriaAdvocate.com? [n = 307] As shown above, 81% of the local residents that had Internet access have visited the Web site of The Victoria Advocate at In a typical week, how many days do you visit VictoriaAdvocate.com? [n = 245] -7-

8 How easy or difficult is it for you to identify the source of the information? [n = 208] When asked Have you ever contributed to VictoriaAdvocate.com? For example, blogs, article comments, photos, calendar items, and etc. 19% of the 208 respondents said yes. Have you ever contributed to VictoriaAdvocate.com? [n = 208] -8-

9 To follow up, those who contributed to the Web site were asked whether their contributions would affect their regard for the credibility of the newspaper or not. Consequently, 32% thought the contribution they made improved their regard, 58% said it made no difference, and 10 percent said it lowered their regard. Caution, however, is recommended when reviewing the findings because the effective sample size (n = 39) was too small. Credibility of The Victoria Advocate and its features How trustworthy do you find the content in The Victoria Advocate? [n = 328] As shown above, 72% of the readers thought the content of The Victoria Advocate was trustworthy, 14% not trustworthy, and 14% neutral, on a 7-point scale ranging from 1 not trustworthy at all to 7 very trustworthy. -9-

10 The readers were then asked to indicate their level of trust about the specific features such as Page A3 Community Calendar and News Articles that usually appear in the newspaper. Letters to the Editor Page A3 Community Calendar -10-

11 News Articles Sports Articles -11-

12 Advertisements on the Newspaper Classified Advertising -12-

13 Advocate Editorial Board Opinions Speak Out Comments -13-

14 TABLE I: Mean scores regarding trustworthiness of features on The Victoria Advocate Question Items Mean Score 1. Letters to the editor Page A3 community calendar News articles Sports articles Advertisements on the newspaper Classified advertising Advocate editorial board opinions Speak out comments 4.73 Notes: 1. The question items were measured on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (not trustworthy at all) to 7 (very trustworthy). Credibility of Similarly, those who have visited VictoriaAdvocate.com were asked about their level of trust in the Web site. As shown below, three-fourths of the Web site users thought the content was trustworthy, 14% not trustworthy, and 11% neutral. How trustworthy do you find the content on VictoriaAdvocate.com? [n = 194] -14-

15 How trustworthy do you find articles on VictoriaAdvocate.com that allow reader comments? [n = 171] Those who not only read the newspaper but also visited its Web site were then asked to compare the trustworthiness of the two media. Seventy-seven percent (77%) of the respondents thought they trusted VictoriaAdvocate.com the same as The Victoria Advocate. How does the trustworthiness of VictoriaAdvocate.com you see compare with the trustworthiness of The Victoria Advocate? [n = 152] -15-

16 How does the trustworthiness of VictoriaAdvocate.com you see compare with the trustworthiness of other Web sites you visit? [n = 143] How trustworthy do you find reader blogs on VictoriaAdvocate.com? [n = 112] -16-

17 Newspaper staff blogs [n = 106] Reader-submitted news articles [n = 128] -17-

18 Newspaper staff-generated news articles [n = 147] Reader comments on articles [n = 140] -18-

19 Online calendar items [n = 118] Advertisements on the Web site [n = 114] -19-

20 Marketplace listings [n = 96] Speak out calls [n = 79] -20-

21 Twitter posts [n = 39] Live webcasts of news meetings and other events [n = 89] -21-

22 How do these features on VictoriaAdvocate.com affect your regard for the overall credibility of The Victoria Advocate? [n = 165] -22-

23 Other credibility issues 47% of the local residents thought it would be beneficial to good journalism online if users are invited to participate in a newspaper s Web site, 21% thought it would be harmful, 13% remained neutral, and 19% were not sure or did not know. Inviting users to participate in a newspaper s Web site [n = 400] Inviting users to provide real identities such as a valid address before participating [n = 400] -23-

24 Respondents split their opinions about whether it would be a good idea or a bad idea that a news Web site does not require real identities for users participation online. In addition, 17% of them were not sure or did not know. Do you think it is a good idea or a bad idea that a news Web site does not require names? [n = 400] How likely is it that you would post a comment on VictoriaAdvocate.com if you must provide your name? [n = 400] -24-

25 Finally, more than one-third of respondents provided their comments in what they would change to improve the credibility of VictoriaAdvocate.com or to increase public participation in the Web site should they be editor of The Victoria Advocate. Here are some of the open-ended responses, edited to remove repetition. The most common responses were to remove bias, slant and opinion; to add conservative voices; to improve accuracy; to eliminate anonymity; include less negativity. If you were editor of The Victoria Advocate, what would you change to improve the credibility of VictoriaAdvocate.com? Separate blogs from news articles. It's a pretty good newspaper. Make sure information is accurate. Check grammar. Pick out more interesting stories, like discussing trash in the park and what to do. Make it more user-friendly. Get rid of blogging. Get a copy editor. Make people responsible for their comments. Be more balanced and less biased. Right to privacy and safety are big concerns. Recognize the area of Victoria is conservative. It needs more local news. Report news accurately. Liked the old style website from before. It's hard to find stuff when they change websites. Take some liberal columnists off and put conservatives on there who tell the truth. The best one is Williams, who has sense. Make the website stand out, with colors. I don't like people posting negative comments. Focus on the positive. A community newspaper should represent the community. There is no accountability. Redo the editorial board; it's influenced by the city council and wealthy people. They're doing the best they can. Have reporters check their sources. That's a tough question. I have no problem with credibility; the reporters open and apparent. Allow equal space for positive and negative comments. More sports. If it was more of a newspaper, like Yahoo and MSN. Make it more interactive. More entertainment. Age and technology is different. Verify identification. Have news up front and another link for blogs. Similar stuff should be grouped together so you don't have to hunt all over for it. When people make a statement, don't change it up. -25-

26 User testimonials. Don't change it. Get a social event section. I would give more coverage to national and state news and less junk. Keep news up to date. More things in bigger cities. Ask everybody what they want and just transfer the news in a format that they like. I think the real news should be on the front page Start asking and concentrating on national stories and ask the general public what they think about immigration and health care. More information to the community about youth. I'd make it more user-friendly. They change it every 6 months. I would get some more writers who know what they re doing. I would call a meeting down town and let them all talk about the stories unpublished and things like that. I think I would speak more about the economy. Leave town. It needs more international news. -26-

27 Demographics In the end of the survey, demographic information such as age, education, ethnicity, total annual household income, location of residence, home ownership, and gender was collected from the respondents. The purpose was to obtain a comprehensive profile of the survey participants for better understanding of the survey results. Age The age groups of the 400 respondents are presented below. The average age was 52.2 years, with a standard deviation of 17.3 years. The ages ranged from 18 to 94. Age Groups [n = 400] Length of residence Years of Residence [n = 399] -27-

28 Location of Residence Home ownership Location of Residence Description of location Percent (%) On a farm 2.8 In a rural area/not a farm 23.5 In a small town less than 10, In a medium town b/w 10,000 but < 40, In a suburb or small city b/w 40,000 but < 150, In a urban area over 150,000 people 0.8 Don t know/not sure 0.3 Refused 0.5 n = 400 In which city do you live? Description of city Percent (%) Victoria 92.3 Bloomington 0.5 Inez 2.0 Nursery 1.3 Placedo 1.3 telferner 1.5 Others 0.5 Refused 0.8 n = 400 Do you own or rent your home? [n = 400] -28-

29 Having children younger than 18 Do you have children under 18 living at home? [n = 400] Education Ethnicity Level of Education Level of Education Percent (%) Less than high school 4.8 High school graduate/ged 23.3 Vocational/Technical/Community college 21.8 Some university but no degree year college degree 23.5 Some graduate work but no degree 1.3 Master's degree 7.5 Doctorate degree 1.8 Don't know/refused 2.0 n = 400 Ethnicity Categories of ethnicity Percent (%) White 71.8 African American 3.8 Latino/Hispanic 17.0 Asian American 0.8 American Indian 1.0 Multiracial 1.8 Others 0.5 Refused 3.5 n =

30 Income Household Income Categories of Income Percent (%) Less than $10, $10,000 but less than $25, $25,000 but less than $50, $50,000 but less than $75, $75,000 but less than $100, $100,000 or more 13.5 Don t know/refused 8.6 n = 400 Gender Gender [n = 400] -30-