We ask: What is the best source for news in Nevada?
In April our pollster Mason-Dixon Polling & Research asked Nevadans where they get their news. The answer paralleled what all the national polls asking that question find.
A majority of Nevadans said they get their news from television. The set was on. There is news on TV. Ipso facto.
The breakdown was television, 53 percent; Internet, 23 percent; newspaper, 18; radio, 4; other or not sure, 2. Those under 35 claimed to get more news from the Internet than TV, and those over 50 were more likely to read newspapers.
This week we asked the question differently and got a different answer.
What is the best source for news and current events in Nevada?
A plurality picked the state’s newspapers and their websites, 27 percent. This was followed by 24 percent for local television stations and their websites; talk radio, 23 percent; cable television, 18 percent; and other Internet sites, 7 percent.
At least people recognize quality, even if they don't always take the time to peruse.
Those 34 and younger chose other Internet sites as the best source, 25 percent, compared to 21 percent for newspapers and their websites, and 21 percent for talk radio. Local TV garnered 13 percent. I suspect this reflects the trend of younger people get news links off of Facebook and Twitter and text messages.
For those 35 and older the breakdown was: newspapers, 28; local TV, 26; talk radio, 23; cable, 19; other Internet, 3.
A majority consider themselves well informed, 52 percent, while 43 percent consider themselves somewhat informed.
This entry was posted on Friday, Jul. 30, 2010 at 07:20 AM
and is filed under Thomas Mitchell.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response.
13
Responses
to "We ask: What is the best source for news in Nevada?"
The better question would have been "What specific "news" do you recall getting from THIS newspaper?" Now THAT would be an interesting answer. I remember the study done not so long ago that asked people a similar question, and the responses were compared to the sources where people got their news. The answers from people that got their "news" from extreme-ultra-conservative "faux" were found to have "learned" the MOST non-"facts" of any people participating in the survey. I would like to see the results of what people "learn" from this newspaper and compare THAT to the facts.
"What is the best source for news and current events in Nevada?"
What did they mean by best? Truthfulness? Completeness? In depth?
What did they mean by best? Truthfulness? Completeness? In depth?
So, Steven, where do you get your "facts" primarily from? Since the RJ gets much of its non-local news from the wires, why do you consider the RJ an "extreme-ultra-conservative" paper? Are the local RJ news stories biased? I agree the editorials are libertarian/conservative, as opposed to most leftist major city papers, but don't see it in the actual news stories.
Winston has a point. The AP feed here is usually unbiased.
The editorial section should be renamed 'fantasy land' though.
The editorial section should be renamed 'fantasy land' though.
Mr. Mitchell remains mum on the fact that he appears to tolerate racially based insults hurled at the President of the United States in the comments sections of the RJ's blogs.
Mr. Smith, I get facts from many sources BUT I can say without any hesitation, that this newspaper is not one of them. And because I have regard for your intelligence Mr. Smith, I know that you know, that the editorial policy of this newspaper has a MAJOR impact on the stories that are "chosen" to be published on these pages. Whether those stories are objectively true or not does not diminish the FACT that those stories are selected for reasons including that they support the editorial stance of this newspaper. I have been trying to get Tom or Sherm to comment for MONTHS now about why it is that the biggest environmental disaster this country has experienced in years; that being the coal slurry spills back east in coal country, have not seen the light of day in this Stephens Group newspaper. Care to hazard a guess? And you make a good point, this paper has no reporters to write stories of national significance. They MUST rely on news services like AP for "their news", and their decisions about which AP stories to publish inevitably come back to their own philosophy. Sherm has repeatedly tried to convince the people who read his stuff, that unless its published HERE, then it ain't news. Now THAT is akin to Tom here suggesting that anyone who does something that is contrary to their own interest is nuts. I tried to point out to him that this would mean all those oven builders in Nazi Germany would have had to be in favor of continuing the holocast, but he never seems to answer. Go figure.
Hey Scout, 'Stepin Fetchit'!
Hey little Stevie A, Keep up on your readings of Alinsky. You're doing a FABULOUS job!
Hey Jerry, if you could magically untwist a regular pretzel, would it be longer or shorter than one of those stick pretzels?
Jack, when did YOU start kissing up to Winston? Are we to believe there MAY be hope for you to glimmer the truth?
Stop Øbama!
Hey little Stevie A, Keep up on your readings of Alinsky. You're doing a FABULOUS job!
Hey Jerry, if you could magically untwist a regular pretzel, would it be longer or shorter than one of those stick pretzels?
Jack, when did YOU start kissing up to Winston? Are we to believe there MAY be hope for you to glimmer the truth?
Stop Øbama!
Every media outlet has their own point of view. The insert paper always derided Bush. The RJ does the same for the guy that was trained and educated by those who would love to have us living in a dictatorship. That is why it is important to cut the legs out of his support in the fall elections.
This paper has always had the same philosophy; protect your own interests. I mean Tom has already said once that anyone who doesn't think of their own interests, to the exclusion of all else, is just dumb. As I have pointed out, this would mean that the oven and gas makers in Nazi Germany could NOT have tried to stop the holocast since it was contrary to "their interests", but according to Tom that was as it should be. All I can say is "WOW"
stevie.alex -- You might try watching Fox News <#1 for 9 years) for a change. Really. You might find out how corrupt and dishonest the politicians are that you slobber all over. I watch CNN and Fox and the difference is staggering, but at least I get both sides of an issue. Of course, you won't watch Fox, either because you wish to stay ignorant, or you don't want to know the truth about your idols. Too bad. You'll continue to criticize something you don't even watch. How hypocritical and ignorant is that? Educate yourself, it's the least you can do.
"stevie.alex -- You might try watching Fox News <#1 for 9 years) for a change."
Just for your own information, Fox News is NOT number in news. But don't feel bad; they're famous for twisting news and information. They CALL themselves a News Channel, then add in the numbers from slanted, crooked and lying editorial programs. (You know, the shows that are named after the person, rather than actually calling it 'news'). You just fell for it like the others. (NBC is the number one watched news show. Probably has something to do with being honest).
"Really. You might find out how corrupt and dishonest the politicians are that you slobber all over."
And you just found out you were wrong about the corrupt and dishonest news channel YOU just slobbered over. Get the real facts about Rupert Murdoch. Go to:
www.OutFoxed.org
"I get both sides of an issue. Of course, you won't watch Fox, either because you wish to stay ignorant"
Now that you watched OutFoxed, or read the real facts about FAUX, you find out YOU were the ignorant one. I'm surprised you hadn't heard about them before.
"You'll continue to criticize something you don't even watch."
Because they've been PROVEN to be slanted. And YOU admit you continue watching them.
"How hypocritical and ignorant is that? Educate yourself, it's the least you can do."
And now that YOU'RE educated; how hypocritical will YOU be? Will you admit you were fooled like the others?
Just for your own information, Fox News is NOT number in news. But don't feel bad; they're famous for twisting news and information. They CALL themselves a News Channel, then add in the numbers from slanted, crooked and lying editorial programs. (You know, the shows that are named after the person, rather than actually calling it 'news'). You just fell for it like the others. (NBC is the number one watched news show. Probably has something to do with being honest).
"Really. You might find out how corrupt and dishonest the politicians are that you slobber all over."
And you just found out you were wrong about the corrupt and dishonest news channel YOU just slobbered over. Get the real facts about Rupert Murdoch. Go to:
www.OutFoxed.org
"I get both sides of an issue. Of course, you won't watch Fox, either because you wish to stay ignorant"
Now that you watched OutFoxed, or read the real facts about FAUX, you find out YOU were the ignorant one. I'm surprised you hadn't heard about them before.
"You'll continue to criticize something you don't even watch."
Because they've been PROVEN to be slanted. And YOU admit you continue watching them.
"How hypocritical and ignorant is that? Educate yourself, it's the least you can do."
And now that YOU'RE educated; how hypocritical will YOU be? Will you admit you were fooled like the others?
The newspaper that has an editor who hangs up on reporters. *eyeroll*
The hypocrisy is overwhelming, Tom.
The hypocrisy is overwhelming, Tom.
Dirty: I didn't mention any politicians. And what I did say is that studies done at Harvard demonstrate that the more people watch "faux" news, the LESS informed they demonstrated themselves to be about the FACTS. If you're interested you can check it out for yourself, but that would open you up to objectivity so be careful.
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
Comments (13)
Registration Notice: The Review-Journal has implemented a new registration procedure that requires all existing and new accounts to validate and login using Facebook. Visit the Registration FAQ for more information.
Share your thoughts on this story.
Sign in or register to make a comment.
Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 24 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.