The vast majority of Americans value their right, as well as that of the press, to question authority figures. But only a third have a lot of confidence in their own ability to challenge leaders if needed.

This is a key insight that emerges from a new American Press Institute survey conducted in collaboration with the NORC at the University of Chicago. Amid a backdrop of polarization and distrust in institutions, including journalism, we sought in December 2018 to understand who feels they can make a difference where they live, what barriers might stand in the way, and how it relates to attitudes and interactions with journalism.

The findings released today suggest good news for those who value the First Amendment. More so than other recent studies, the research shows most Americans view holding political leaders accountable as an important function of the press. It also finds a majority of Americans value their own right to question leaders in politics, business, and their community.

Yet the results also raise concerns about whether people in today’s confusing media environment feel they can make a difference as citizens. In particular, the results indicate that people are unsure about whether they can make an impact in their community and country, including when it comes to holding the powerful accountable. Some Americans, roughly 2 in 10, feel they can make life around them better, both in their immediate vicinity and in the U.S. writ large. Others are less likely to feel that way. And most people do not feel they can hold true to the rights the First Amendment enshrines: they do not feel they could question authority figures if needed.

The influence of the changing media environment is discernible as well. More Americans say they think they understand important national issues rather than local issues. Those who seek out news and those who pay for news are more likely to say they understand issues than those who do not. But these specific media behaviors do not have significant effects on people’s perceived efficacy, who feels they can make an impact and who does not.

From the findings:

• The public believes holding political leaders accountable is an important job of the media, combating other narratives. Previous research, including our own earlier in 2018, has shown modest if not low support for the “watchdog” function of the press. When the question was asked differently, however, about the press “holding political leaders accountable,” the results were different. Nearly 3 out of 4 Americans (73 percent) say this is very or extremely important. That is a 19-percentage point jump from our question last year about the watchdog role, suggesting the need for more research.
• The public also says its own right to question authority figures is important. Thinking of the rights to free speech and petition in the First Amendment, we asked people if they felt the broader “right to question” leadership of different kinds was important. It is indeed — over 3 out of 4 Americans (77 percent) say it is very or extremely important to question political leaders and nearly the same (74 percent) say the same about community leaders. Although the public is slightly less likely to value the right to question business leaders, still 64 percent say it is very or extremely important.
• At the same time, the public does not feel it can adequately question authority on its own. Many people value their right to challenge authority, but do not have a lot of confidence in their own ability to question leaders if needed. For example, about a third of Americans feel very sure they could question political leaders (34 percent), with another third feeling moderately confident, and the remaining third not all that confident. Even the people who most value their right to question leaders feel limited, with only 4 in 10 (41 percent) saying they are very confident in their own ability.
• More generally, many Americans feel they can make at least some difference in where they live, especially locally. Thirty-nine percent of people think they can make a large or moderate impact in their local community. That compares with 27 percent who think they can do that on the national level.
• But people are more likely to say they understand important issues facing the country than those facing their community. Most Americans feel their agency resides more immediately around them, but people are more likely to say they understand national issues rather than local ones (78 percent vs. 72 percent). Moreover, people are more likely to put greater confidence in how well they know national issues — e.g., 37 percent of Americans say they understand national issues very well versus 28 percent who say the same about local issues.
• Demographics appear to matter. African Americans are more likely than whites and Hispanics to believe they understand important issues and can make an impact (44 percent vs. 25 percent and 23 percent, respectively). Older adults tend to believe they have a better understanding of national issues than younger adults (41 percent vs. 32 percent), while younger adults are more likely to believe they can improve their country (33 percent vs. 22 percent).
• Basic media behaviors in today’s environment relate to understanding and competence talking about important issues, but not perceptions of efficacy. We looked at how two aspects of media usage might relate to people’s feelings about impact: whether they seek out news and whether they pay for it. Both factors influence whether people say they understand important issues and feel qualified to discuss them, but they do not significantly relate to people’s perceived ability to make change where they live. For example, 42 percent of people who pay for news say they understand important issues compared with 31 percent of those who don’t pay for news, but those who pay for news are not significantly more likely to say they can make a difference where they live (43 percent vs. 35 percent).

Overall, the results suggest a complicated picture of civic engagement today. However, we can say that the public, despite its critiques of today’s journalism, may find at least some common cause with the press. People value providing a check on power. But they may not all feel empowered to carry out that function, or more simply improve the places they live. And though it is unclear the extent to which interaction with media affects people’s perceptions of their influence in the public square, the press must find common cause with the public. For as advertising plays a smaller role and public and philanthropic support a larger one, more of journalism’s future will depend on the public’s assessment of its contribution to democracy and their communities.

About the study

NORC at the University of Chicago conducted the study in collaboration with the American Press Institute, working together on the survey questions, methods, and analysis. NORC and API are part of a longtime research collaboration, the Media Insight Project, that is designed to inform the news industry and the public about various important issues facing journalism and the news business. NORC fielded the survey December 13-16, 2018 using the AmeriSpeak® Panel, the probability-based panel of NORC at the University of Chicago. Online and telephone interviews were conducted with 1,067 adults, and the margin of sampling error is plus or minus 4.1 percentage points.

This survey was conducted with the support and partnership of Democracy Fund, a bipartisan foundation that for several years has made general operating grants to API. The relationship began with funding to study the effects of fact-checking journalism and now supports API’s wider work to understand audiences, build reader revenue, improve accountability journalism and succeed at organizational change.

Chapter 2

Holding Power Accountable: The press and the public

There are many kinds of journalism, but at the heart of their constitutional responsibilities, journalists are in the business of monitoring and keeping a check on people and institutions in power.

Journalists, valuing this function, often refer to this job as “watchdog” journalism. Reporters keep an eye over their communities, especially the actions of government leaders, in order to protect them.

For those who value that idea, including many journalists, a good deal of traditional polling recently may give pause. Research earlier in 2018 from API and AP-NORC, for instance, found that just over half (54 percent) think it’s important that the press “act as a watchdog.”

In this new survey, however, we asked about that function in a different way. Instead of the “watchdog” term common in journalist vernacular, we chose more straightforward (and still common) language. Do people think it’s important for the press to hold political leaders accountable?

In our survey, the answer to that question was less grim. A large majority of Americans say it’s important that the press holds political leaders accountable. Nearly 3 out of 4 Americans (73 percent) say this is very or extremely important. That is a 19-percentage point jump from our question last year, which asked about the “watchdog.”

Importance	Act as a watchdog	Hold political leaders accountable
Extremely important	24%	44%
Very important	29%	29%
Moderately important [Somewhat important]	30%	17%
Not too important [Not very important]	10%	5%
Not at all important	5%	4%

Data Source: Question: Thinking about the news media, how important is it for news organizations to do the following? [Hold political leaders accountable]
Question: How important do you think each of the following is for the news media to try to do? [Act as a watchdog of powerful institutions and people]
Source: API/NORC poll conducted December 13-16, 2018, with 1,067 adults nationwide and API/AP-NORC Media Insight Project poll conducted March 21-April 17, 2018 with 2,019 adults nationwide.

American Press Institute

The reasons for this will require more contemplation and research. Does some terminology or the way we describe journalism resonate better with Americans? Was something fundamentally different happening during the two time periods these surveys were fielded? Or was it a combination of these and other factors?

More detailed findings on Americans’ views of the press and its accountability role follow below.

Most Americans view holding political leaders accountable as an important function of the press’s job.

The public believes holding political leaders accountable is an important job of the media. Forty-four percent say it is extremely important for news organizations to hold political leaders accountable, 29 percent say very important, 17 percent say moderately important, and only 9 percent say not too or not at all important.

A similar portion of Americans say it is very important news organizations hold political leaders accountable (74 percent) as say the same about reporting the latest news (71 percent). Slightly more Americans believe it is very important for news organizations to deal fairly with all sides (81 percent). And fewer people say the same about news organizations providing context along with facts (66 percent).

Function	Not at all/Not too important	Somewhat important	Very/Extremely important
To deal fairly with all sides	6%	12%	81%
To hold political leaders accountable	8%	17%	73%
To report the latest news as it happens	7%	22%	71%
To report the facts, but also provide some context	13%	21%	66%

Data Source: Question: Thinking about the news media, how important is it for news organizations to do the following?
Source: API/NORC poll conducted December 13-16, 2018, with 1,067 adults nationwide

American Press Institute

Americans’ beliefs about the importance of news organizations holding political leaders accountable differ depending on people’s age, education, partisanship, and views toward following news.

People who are older, those who are highly educated, and those who identify as Democrats are all more likely than those who are younger, have less education, and identify as Republicans or independents to say it is very important that news organizations hold political leaders accountable.

Population	Percent who say holding political leaders accountable is very/extremely important
Education
Bachelors or above	82%
Some college	74%
HS graduate	68%
No HS diploma	60%
Age
Aged 60+	82%
Aged 45-59	74%
Aged 30-44	73%
Aged 18-29	61%
Party
Democrat	84%
Independent	62%
Republican	66%

Data Source: Question: Thinking about the news media, how important is it for news organizations to do the following?
Source: API/NORC poll conducted December 13-16, 2018, with 1,067 adults nationwide

American Press Institute

Eighty-two percent of those 60 and older say it is very or extremely important for news organizations to hold political leaders accountable compared with 74 percent of those 45-59 years old, 73 percent of those 30-44 years old, and 61 percent of those 18-29 years old.

Likewise, 82 percent of those with a college degree say it is very or extremely important for news organizations to hold political leaders accountable compared with 74 percent of those with some college education, 68 percent of those with a high school degree, and 60 percent of those without a high school degree.

Partisanship and opinions toward following news are also related to views about the importance of the media holding political leaders accountable.

Eighty-four percent of Democrats say it is very/extremely important for news organizations to hold political leaders accountable compared with 66 percent of Republicans and 62 percent of independents.

Eighty-five percent of those who say it is personally important to follow the news also say it is very important for news organizations to hold political leaders accountable, compared with 60 percent of those who say following the news is moderately or less important to them.

The public’s own role

In addition to looking at how the public viewed the accountability role of the press, we also wanted to explore other ways Americans see checks on those in power.

Taking a wider view of the U.S. system of government and rights, other forces help monitor the actions of influential leaders and institutions. Some of these forces — or at least abilities — reside in the American public.

As stated in the First Amendment, Americans have the right to free speech. They can speak their mind, including challenging their leaders. And they can petition, assemble, and question authority in public ways.

We wanted to explore how the public views this overarching capability to question authority figures, which is related in concept to the press’s accountability role.

Most adults say their right to publicly question authority figures is important.

The public values its right to question the actions or decisions of political, business and community leaders.

Seventy-seven percent say it is very or extremely important to question political leaders and 74 percent say the same about community leaders. Although the public is slightly less likely to value the right to question business leaders, still 64 percent say it is very or extremely important.

Less than 1 in 10 Americans say it is not too important or not at all important to question political, business, or community leaders.

Adults with college degrees are more likely than those with less education to say it is important to question leaders. For example, 86 percent of those with a college degree say it is very or extremely important to question political leaders compared with 82 percent of those with some college education, 71 percent with a high school degree, and 51 percent with no high school diploma.

News behavior is also related to valuing the right to question authority figures. Eighty-six percent of those who seek out news say the right to question political leaders is very or extremely important compared with 65 percent who primarily bump into news.

However, the majority of Americans do not have a lot of confidence in their ability to question political, business, or community leaders if needed.

Despite the public strongly valuing the right to question leaders, most people do not have a lot of confidence that they could question such leaders if needed.

Thirty-four percent say they are very or extremely confident they could question political leaders, 35 percent are moderately confident, and 30 percent are not too or not at all confident.

Similarly, 35 percent are very or extremely confident they could question community leaders, 37 percent are moderately confident, and 26 percent are not too or not at all confident.

Many people who strongly value the right to question leaders do not feel confident in their ability to do so if needed. Among those who say it is important to publicly question political or community leaders, only 4 in 10 are very or extremely confident in their ability to question such leaders if needed.

African Americans tend to have more confidence in their ability to question leaders than whites or Hispanics. For example, 54 percent of African Americans report they are very or extremely confident they could question community leaders compared with 31 percent of whites and 31 percent of Hispanics.

People who say it is very important to them to follow the news are more likely to have confidence they can question leaders than those who place less importance on following news. Forty-seven percent who report it is very important for them to follow news have confidence they could question political leaders compared with 19 percent who say it is moderately important to follow news and 16 percent who say it is not too or not at all important to follow news.

Do Americans’ views on accountability journalism relate to how they view their own accountability function?

In our analysis, we wanted to see if these two ideas are related: Are views on the press’s function to hold the powerful accountable in any way connected to how Americans see their own rights to question authority?

We saw some connections in the data.

People’s views that the press should hold political leaders accountable are tied to beliefs about their own rights and abilities to question political leaders.

People who believe that it is important for news organizations to hold political leaders accountable are more likely to value their right to publicly question political leaders and more likely to have confidence in their ability to do such questioning.

Eighty-seven percent of those who believe that it is very or extremely important for the press to hold political leaders accountable also highly value their own right to publicly question politicians compared with 52 percent of those who view the accountability of leaders as moderately important and 50 percent who say it is not that important.

Population	Percent who view their own ability to question political leaders is very/extremely important
Those who view accountability role as very important	87%
Those who view accountability role as moderately important	52%
Those who view accountability role as unimportant	50%

Data Source: Question: How important to you is your right to publicly question the [actions/decisions] of the following authority figures?
Source: API/NORC poll conducted December 13-16, 2018, with 1,067 adults nationwide

American Press Institute

Likewise, those who view the press’s watchdog function as important are more likely to have confidence in their own ability to hold leaders accountable. Thirty-nine percent of those who view press leadership accountability as very or extremely important are also very confident in their own ability to question political leaders, compared with 19 percent of those who view accountability as less important.

Population	Percent who have confidence in their own ability to question political leaders
Those who view accountability role as very important	39%
Those who view accountability role as moderately important	20%
Those who view accountability role as unimportant	20%

Data Source: Question: How confident are you in your own ability to publicly question the actions/decisions of the following authority figures if needed?
Source: API/NORC poll conducted December 13-16, 2018, with 1,067 adults nationwide

American Press Institute

Chapter 3

Improving community and the country

Another way journalists might describe a goal of journalism is to help people live better lives in their communities.

To further understand the relationship between the public and the press, we wanted to see how views of where people lived, and their agency within it, related to interactions with news.

As local news sources continue to face difficulty in today’s digital and economic environment, we were particularly curious about how people viewed this in context of their community and country.

The findings show many Americans feel at least somewhat qualified to talk about important issues in the news, and that they have at least some agency to make things better in their community and country.

More detailed findings on this big picture are below. The next section, however, explores differences in who feels they can make an impact, and who is less likely to say so.

Most Americans feel at least somewhat qualified to talk with family and friends about important issues in the news, but few feel very qualified.

Seventy-four percent of Americans report feeling at least somewhat qualified to participate in discussions with friends and family about important issues in the news, but only 34 percent feel very or extremely qualified.

	Percent who say they are qualified to discuss important issues
Not at all qualified	6%
Not too qualified	20%
Somewhat qualified	39%
Very qualified	24%
Extremely qualified	10%

Data Source: Question: In general, how qualified do you feel you are to participate in discussions with family or friends about important issues in the news?
Source: API/NORC poll conducted December 13-16, 2018, with 1,067 adults nationwide

American Press Institute

Men (38 percent) are more likely than women (30 percent) to believe they are qualified to discuss important issues in the news.

Adults with more formal education also feel better qualified. Forty-eight percent of those with a college degree feel very qualified to discuss important issues compared with 35 percent of those with some college education and 19 percent of those with a high school degree.

Most adults report understanding important issues, but people are more likely to say they understand national issues than local ones.

Seventy-eight percent of adults feel they understand important issues facing the U.S. at least somewhat well, including 37 percent who say very or extremely well. Only 18 percent of Americans think they understand the issues only a little and 3 percent say they don’t at all understand the issues.

Americans are less likely to report understanding local issues, but still 72 percent say they at least somewhat understand issues facing their community, including 28 percent who understand them very or extremely well. In contrast, 22 percent say they understand local issues a little and 6 percent report not understanding them at all.

	Local	National
Not at all well	6%	3%
A little	22%	18%
Somewhat well	45%	42%
Very well	21%	26%
Extremely well	7%	10%

Data Source: Question: How well do you feel you understand the important issues facing your [community/country]?
Source: API/NORC poll conducted December 13-16, 2018, with 1,067 adults nationwide

American Press Institute

A majority of people report a similar level of understanding about national and local issues, but there are some who know more about local issues and others who say they know more about national issues.

Fifty-six percent say they understand neither local nor national issues very well while 21 percent say they understand both very well. Sixteen percent of individuals feel that they understand the issues facing the country very or extremely well, but understand the issues facing their community less well. In contrast, 7 percent report understanding their community issues very or extremely well and the country’s issues less well.

	Percent of adults
Understand neither national nor local issues well	56%
Understand local, but not national issues	7%
Understand national, but not local issues	16%
Understand both local and national issues well	21%

Data Source: Questions: How well do you feel you understand the important issues facing your [community/country]?
Source: API/NORC poll conducted December 13-16, 2018, with 1,067 adults nationwide

American Press Institute

Many Americans believe they can make a larger difference in their community than in the country overall.

Nearly 9 in 10 people say they can make their community a better place to live, including 1 in 10 who say they can make a big impact and 3 in 10 who believe they can make a moderate impact. Forty-seven percent believe they can make a small impact in their community and 12 percent don’t think they can make any impact.

Americans tend to believe they can make less of an impact in making their country a better place to live than their community. Seven percent believe they can make a big impact on their country, 20 percent say moderate impact, 53 percent say small impact, and 19 percent believe they can’t have any impact.

	Community	Country
No impact	12%	19%
A small impact	47%	53%
A moderate impact	31%	20%
A big impact	8%	7%

Data Source: Question: How much impact do you think you can have in making your [community/country] a better place?
Source: API/NORC poll conducted December 13-16, 2018, with 1,067 adults nationwide

American Press Institute

Chapter 4

Demographic differences in efficacy

People differ in how much understanding they feel they have of important issues they might see in the news, and in how much ability they have to improve the places they live.

Two dividing lines we saw in our data cut across age and race.

Older Americans are more likely to believe they have a better understanding of national issues, while younger Americans are more likely to believe they can improve their country.

Age tends to have an impact on people’s beliefs about their understanding of national issues and their perceptions about being able to improve their community.

Forty-one percent of adults 45 and older say they understand the important issues facing their country very or extremely well, compared with only 32 percent of adults aged 18-44. In contrast, only 22 percent of adults 45 and older think they can make a moderate or big impact in their country, compared to 33 percent of those aged 18-44.

While those aged 18-29 and those aged 30-44 have comparable levels of knowledge of national issues, individuals aged 18-29 report a distinctly lower knowledge of local issues. Eighteen percent say they understand issues in their community very or extremely well, compared to 34 percent of those aged 30-44 and those aged 45-59, and 25 percent of those 65 and older. Those aged 18-29 however have similar views on their ability to make an impact as those aged 30-44 (47 percent v. 45 percent).

African Americans tend to be more likely than whites and Hispanics to believe they understand important issues and can make an impact.

Forty-four percent of African Americans report they understand issues in their community very well compared with 25 percent of whites and 23 percent of Hispanics. African Americans are also more likely than whites or Hispanics to say they have a good understanding of national issues (49 percent vs. 36 percent and 28 percent, respectively).

African Americans also are more likely to believe they can make an impact in their community. Fifty-five percent of African Americans say they can make a moderate or big impact in their community compared with 41 percent of Hispanics and 36 percent of whites.

Media behavior, understanding of issues and perceived efficacy

We also wanted to know if any of these concepts related to how people view and engage with news. We found some correlations, and identified additional questions to study.

People who actively seek out news, those who say following news is important to them, and those who pay for news are all more likely to believe they understand issues and are qualified to discuss such matters.

People’s news consumption is related to both understanding important issues and perceptions about making an impact.

Overall, when asked how important it is for them to personally keep up with news and information, 53 percent say it is very or extremely important, 38 percent say it is moderately important, and just 8 percent say it is not very or not at all important.

Americans who say it is very or extremely important to them to follow the news are more likely to believe they are very qualified to discuss important issues in the news than those who say following the news is moderately important or not important (54 percent vs. 13 percent and 9 percent).

Forty-eight percent of those who say following the news is very important to them report they can make a moderate or big impact in their community compared with 31 percent who say following the news is moderately important and 22 percent who say following the news is not very important. Similarly, 33 percent of those who say following news is very important to them also say they can make a moderate or big impact in their country, compared with 20 percent of those who view following news as moderately important or unimportant.

When asked about how they get news, 61 percent say they actively seek out news and information, while 39 percent say they mostly bump into news and information as they do other things or hear about it from others.

In addition, about half of people report paying for a news source or donating to a news organization. In particular, 54 percent say they either pay for a magazine, newspaper, newsletter, news site, or podcast or donate to a public radio or TV station.

How people get news and whether they pay for news are both strongly tied to understanding important issues, but not significantly related to people’s beliefs about their ability to improve their community or country.

Forty-five percent of those who seek out news say they are very qualified to participate in discussions with family or friends about important issues in the news compared with 18 percent of those who say they mainly bump into news. Likewise, 44 percent of those who mainly seek out news say they feel they understand important national issues very well compared with 25 percent of those who bump into news. Additionally, thirty-two percent of those who mainly seek out news report understanding issues in their community very well, compared with only 21 percent of those who mostly bump into news.

People who report paying for news are more likely than those who do not pay to both feel qualified to discuss important issues and believe they understand issues facing the country. Forty-percent of people who pay for news believe they are very qualified to talk about important issues compared with 27 percent of those who do not pay. Likewise, 44 percent of those who pay for news say they understand important issues facing the country very or extremely well compared with 25 percent who do not pay for news. However, there is not a significant difference between payers of news and nonpayers when it comes to understanding issues about their community.

In contrast, there is no significant difference in beliefs about the ability to improve their community or the country between those who seek out news and those who primarily bump into news or between those who pay for news and those who don’t pay for news.

In short, people who more deeply engage with news on these measures have an increased understanding of important issues in the public square, but they do not seem to feel more agency to improve where they live.

Chapter 5

Study Methodology and Topline

NORC at the University of Chicago conducted the study in collaboration with the American Press Institute and funding and partnership from Democracy Fund. The survey was co-designed and written by API and NORC with support and engagement throughout the process by Tom Glaisyer and Jessica Mahone of Democracy Fund. Data were collected using AmeriSpeak Omnibus®, a monthly multi-client survey using NORC’s probability-based panel designed to be representative of the U.S. household population.

During the initial recruitment phase of the panel, randomly selected U.S. households were sampled with a known, non-zero probability of selection from the NORC National Sample Frame and then contacted by U.S. mail, email, telephone, and field interviewers (face-to-face). The panel provides sample coverage of approximately 97 percent of the U.S. household population. Those excluded from the sample include people with P.O. Box only addresses, some addresses not listed in the USPS Delivery Sequence File, and some newly constructed dwellings.

Interviews for this survey were conducted between December 13 and 16, 2018, with adults age 18 and over representing the 50 states and the District of Columbia. Panel members were randomly drawn from AmeriSpeak, and 1,067 completed the survey—992 via the web and 75 via telephone. Interviews were conducted in both English and Spanish, depending on respondent preference. The final stage completion rate is 20.1 percent, the weighted household panel response rate is 34.2 percent, and the weighted household panel retention rate is 85.1 percent, for a cumulative response rate of 5.8 percent. The overall margin of sampling error is +/- 4.1 percentage points at the 95 percent confidence level, including the design effect. The margin of sampling error may be higher for subgroups.

Once the sample has been selected and fielded, and all the study data have been collected and made final, a poststratification process is used to adjust for any survey nonresponse as well as any non-coverage or under- and oversampling resulting from the study-specific sample design. Poststratification variables included age, gender, Census division, race/ethnicity, and education. Weighting variables were obtained from the 2018 Current Population Survey. The weighted data reflect the U.S. population of adults age 18 and over.

All differences reported between subgroups of the U.S. population are at the 95 percent level of statistical significance, meaning that there is only a 5 percent (or lower) probability that the observed differences could be attributed to chance variation in sampling.

Researchers

From the American Press Institute

• Tom Rosenstiel
• Kevin Loker
• Jeff Sonderman

From NORC at the University of Chicago

• David Sterrett
• William Bonnell
• Jennifer Benz
• Trevor Tompson

From Democracy Fund

• Jessica Mahone (now Duke University)

Topline

For printing and offline viewing, a PDF version of the topline survey results are available for download.