TED Conversations

Alisa Miller

President & CEO, Public Radio International (PRI)

TEDCRED 200+
TED Attendee

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

Who do you trust more to help you understand world events, the press, politicians or your friends/family, or someone/something else? Why?

I would like to know who/what, the TED community trusts most to give them the news, information and knowledge they need to follow and understand major events, live their lives successfully, be connected in their communities, and more generally understand our world. What are the trade offs of these sources as you view them? Do you have time to think about it?

Related Talks:
Topics: better world community family friends journalism news politics public good
+3
Share:

Closing Statement from Alisa Miller

Wow everyone. What a thoughtful set of postings -- Lindsay, special thanks to you for your ongoing comments and "facilitation" of the discussion. Excellent.

If I look across the responses, it seems the answer to "who we trust" to understand world events or topics that are global in nature is not an easy one. In our personal lives, the people we trust most are family and friends, but these people may not have the information or mastery we need. At the same time, there is great concern about a lack of transparency in our "news" and many have come to no longer trust of many information sources. So we need to curate on behalf of our own knowledge: a mix of family/friends, news and information sources, art music and culture, and other "lenses" too as we seek the truth of what is really going on in this interconnected world. New tools and services are emerging to help us with this effort. Your responses have inspired me. And at the end of June, I plan to launch a website, twitter feed, and Facebook page to continue this conversation, share tips and advice on how to better inform ourselves about the world through news and other content. I hope you might check it out. www.newsmakeover.com.

progress indicator

  • frank mcneil

    • 0
    May 23 2011: The obvious answer is our opinions and understanding of world events are a sum of all we are exposed to. For me the least trust worthy sources of world events are the network news broadcasts. I take basic facts from news outlets but listen carefully for their point of views and opinions as they filter into the story. I think we must also consider historical perspectives on current day events as well. We can not believe one word our politicians utter without our own fact check being employed. our elected officials and mass media outlets seem more intent on pushing agendas and framing all current events to meet this goal than just merely telling the truth and let the audiance form their own opinions. Its as if they don't trust the public in general enough to allow them the opportunity to assess the facts. This tactic has brought me to the point of total mistrust. I read multiple newspapers, watch multiple news broadcast and then call upon my own knowledge to form my opinions. Its too bad and very sad there is no one real trusted source of news.
  • thumb

    Vipul Survase

    • 0
    May 23 2011: I'm a staunch believer of Buddhism, so meditation helps me.
  • thumb

    Hao Wang

    • 0
    May 23 2011: Personally, I think I am a skeptical guy, I will never trust anyone or anything all the time. I think the world is mixed with facts and artificial things, you will get embarrassed when you absorb anything and take them for granted. Everyone need to distinguish these thing, to develop our criticizing ability.
  • thumb

    Karol Batek 20+

    • 0
    TED Translator
    May 23 2011: True journalism is a dying trade. Oddly enough, new media is contributing to it the most (I recommend you this great complex documentary Page One (2011) about one year in The New York Times that deals with the transformation of the media industry at its time of greatest turmoil). Despite this contradiction I think the best way to understand world is to have as much imput as possible and the truth is hiding somewhere in the middle. So I go with all of a mentioned.

    One more though. Two months ago I was reading an amazing article about the way people search news on the internet. Despite a truckload of sources on any topic you can possibly look for, people tend to search only those sources that correspond with their political views, beliefs etc. So let's say you are a liberal looking for more news on gay marriage. You are more likely to just browse through a liberal media like Huffington Post or NYT, but you probably won't care what republican media like Washington Post or Fox News have to say about the cause. By that selection process you are blocking yourself from getting the full picture, therefore you voluntarily distort your understanding of the cause. And if that is the way you obtain the news, I don't trust you. What's even more troubling, search engines are adapting to your taste and mirror it in the future search results, so I also want to recommend you this talk: http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/eli_pariser_beware_online_filter_bubbles.html

    And if you are not in a hurry, then wait a few decades - time always shows the right face of the past events through arts.
    • thumb

      Jáfia Câmara 50+

      • 0
      TED Translator
      May 23 2011: Fox News is a very unreliable source of news. It's the last place I would go for news, But to be fair, I don't very often read MSBC either.
  • thumb

    Ken brown 30+

    • 0
    May 23 2011: I trust the bible,it's simple,it has a starting point and a finishing point,everthing else is in between,now from stating that. E A mercer is bang on but i beg to differ on one small point,we have more accumulated knowledge to draw upon and so will the next generation.it's all in the encode except i hate people that try to make you go "Oooooooh! and Aaaaaaaah"
  • thumb

    Andrea Morisette Grazzini 30+

    • +1
    May 21 2011: Alisa,

    I trust any and all sources and voices (including media) which demonstrate respect, sincerity, insight and objectivity.

    I tend to distrust any which demonstrate an attitude or pattern that inhibits their own or other's transparency. Including media that give voice to unidentified or coercive sources that produce non-contructive, or worse, destructive influence without due qualification.

    I value those who (as you do here) who seek the wisdom of many different people and perspectives. And am heartened when they apply these.

    On the other hand, I reject the opinions of anyone, near or far in any venue or forum that overtly, insidiously, manipulatively or by-proxy abet brutal rhetoric or activities.

    And tend to avoid or proceed with extreme caution those entities, institutions or people that persistently or stubbornly defend, justify or deny their human capacity or evidence thereof to "do harm." This would suggest they view themselves as omniscient. Not a good sign of objectivity or insight :-).

    Andrea

  • Militza RANGEL

    • 0
    May 17 2011: I trust the alternative media NOT the corporate media because they information is mostly based on lies to protect their owners.

  • Toshinobu Masai

    • 0
    TED Translator
    May 16 2011: it is very interesting question to answer. I think statement of both media and national government is fully exaggerated with their points of view. I fed up to hear their words. I trust people who say their idea easy to understand for us. The information with complicated idea was created by reading books by great writers. (they throw Their idea as his or her idea) If you could not understand , you can ask the question according to wonders on you. If there is someone who answer the question with plain words is the person who you feel truth not trust. of course I will read many newspapers, specific field magazine and so forth.

    I do not trust people. trust is sometimes dependance on people. I always find solution with someone or any other people. It is the reason why I am doing networking. the amount of people will provide me many points of view to inspire to create new stuff on the inspiration.

    I sometimes use words of internationally trusted people such as TED is to pretend one of the people on the field. But the pretendance was revealed eventually though. I think the most important point is up to you whether you can understand or not.
  • thumb

    liz Tuohy

    • 0
    May 15 2011: I don't look to any one source, as I have found any one is insufficient, to understand major events, live my life and be connected in my community. I have learned that national tv network news, as well as cable news, cover events THEY deem worthy, rather than covering events that are worthy. One news source that represents a more unbiased view is PBS. Though I subscribe to a local newspaper and read it everyday, I read the NY Times and the Washington Post occasionally, mostly because I can and it's available. But with all of the above, I still do not feel like I have all the information. I do value talking to other people and hearing their take on things, but I admit I don't always agree with them. When I talk to friends who have connections to politicians/politics I realize how much is not discussed in public forums and the reasons why. I feel disappointed in the average person's knowledge of current and past events and fear this ignorance.

    I value, as many who have written here, NPR, and wish for other sources as honest and open.

    This is an interesting forum. Thanks to all who have written here.
  • thumb

    Kimberly Kradel

    • 0
    May 15 2011: I don't think I "trust" any one person or outlet for news/information. I do read newspapers, blogs, news sites online, watch my twitter flow for random newsy posts - that's how I found out about the earthquake in Japan - and listen to the radio occasionally, usually NPR. I try and get a wide spectrum of details and then form my own opinions, or the whole story rather than the just a piece ...Television news has fallen out of favor with me because it's so hype driven - when I was a kid I trusted Walter Cronkite as I got older I watched Peter Jennings, but now I rarely watch television news. I think the whole medium is shifting or morphing into something else, and it's too early to tell which direction it is going into.

  • Sablcious Faux

    • 0
    May 14 2011: With the advent of the Interent one would be a fool to outright trust anyone! All the information we need is at our fingertips and one can easily make their own dedcutions - free of the bias and prejudice that's inherent in anyone's personal take on a particular situation - with the wealth of sources we are now presented with.

    The smart person questions everything and everyone and takes nothing as 'gospel' but fact.
  • thumb

    Lindsay Newland Bowker 50+

    • 0
    May 12 2011: So our President and Secretary of State and other key officials who were the source of that absurd initial story were actually watching it live..and stll said that????? Almost agonizing that even the most reliable news sources are so manipulated .
  • thumb

    Talip OZDEMIR

    • 0
    May 11 2011: I think it's really a very hard situation feel that you do not have at least one person to trust on everything. I can just give examples and only the truths. For example I don't trust TED.com management because I'm new here. But I trust my prime minister Erdogan. I don't trust Obama. I trust Bosnians. I don't trust myself.
  • thumb

    Anna Czyrska

    • 0
    May 11 2011: i think first we need to trust ourself.
  • thumb

    Alan Bishop

    • 0
    May 9 2011: Alisa, good news is constructed from gathering all the facts and ensuring that the facts are validated. In this age of high speed social media the world is awash with imagery that is often times short on facts. By the time facts become known pundits have already put their own spin on events and an ever cynical public is distrusting the information provided and adding their own spin. Many news sources have abandoned good news making and almost stopped rigorously examining information before declaring these as facts.

    I believe that there are good sources of news that you can trust to be presenting good information without spin. In this group I include your organization, the BBC, Al Jazeera and a number of broadsheet news papers. Fox, MSNBC, CNN and others are opinion providers, I rarely use these sources for news and only occasionally watch these sources for entertainment. Having said that my grandfather taught me to do my own investigation. He would by three or four broadsheets on a Sunday, pick one story and compare the facts presented. What we learned from this was that the facts presented can be wrong, my grandfather said the only thing you can really believe is the date at the top of the news paper. He did add that on one occasion he even found the date was wrong.

    What I learned was to be very selective when it came to choosing sources of news. I really hope PRI continues to maintain its very high standards in news investigating and providing. All power to you.
  • thumb

    Jim Moonan 30+

    • 0
    May 5 2011: For me, NPR and it's affilates are hands-down the best sources for general information/news. No question about it.

    For more detailed information on news events you've got to spend the time necessary to sift through the deluge of information that screams for our attention. Not an easy task!

    CNN also does a decent job of news coverage.
  • thumb

    Lindsay Newland Bowker 50+

    • 0
    May 3 2011: To the point of who do we trust in the media here is a really fasinating piece from slate comparing the details and cited sources across a broad spectrum of specifically named journals and news outlets..just astomonishing ..so many discrepancies and variations even on quotes from official whaite gouse staements..http://www.slate.com/id/2292717?wpisrc=xs_wp_0001st really puts Alisa News anbout the News in clear light and also her question "who do we truct" in journalism?

  • Caroline Culbertson

    • +1
    May 3 2011: As an unergrad student, I'm smack dab in the middle of the generation that is so often scorned for being ‘lazy’ because of our utilization(or is it dependence?) of the immediate availability of information on the Internet. I am also lucky enough to be taking one of the first (of many, I’m sure) classes dedicated to understanding social, cultural, behavioral, and even neurological tendencies on the Internet. From my perspective, which has radically changed during this course, gaining ‘facts’ has become a more involved, collaborative process than simply reading one newspaper story and claiming to understand a situation since the Internet. While I interned in a major news source in NYC, I realized that many of the stories we produced were tweeted, posted on Facebook, and most commonly, hyperlinked on blogs.

    I think so much of what we rely on today (especially my ‘lazy’ generation) is a variety of sources, both private and public. I rarely believe things word of mouth anymore, and am quick to Google anything I find suspicious. This might lead me to a news story, then blog post, then to a forum discussion, and then to a Twitter feed. The Internet allows, or rather, facilitates our ability to find a myriad of viewpoints, opinions, etc. on a single topic. I think that this culmination is what I most rely on in understanding current events.

    Last night’s news was a perfect example of how this occurs. I found out about Osama bin Laden’s death via text message last night, and I immediately went to CNN.com to get the full story. I read updates and simultaneously watched a streaming video. About that time, my mom called me and said she was reading about it online. I clicked to my Facebook page and at least 10 of my friends’ statuses were about the news. One of my peers stayed glued to her Twitter feed to get the latest updates.In closing, I will link to her post on the intersection of social media and news:http://www.hastac.org/blogs/caroline-buck/all-we-really-need-twitter
    • thumb

      Lindsay Newland Bowker 50+

      • 0
      May 3 2011: so many different and worthy points here right at the heart of Alisa's question..thank you..I wonder if you saw Alisa's Ted Talk .(link above) the news about the news....you seem to be syaing that it was your own direct expereience that news produced by a major network was sourced ad hoc..much of it from sicial mdeia..rather thna produced as whta we call "jorunalism" is that what you are saying? And if so re you also cautioning us not to trust ay newtork news? Is there anyone you trust in news today?..
  • thumb

    Luis Martinez

    • +1
    May 2 2011: Hi Alissa,
    This is a great question. It is hard to say if anyone trusts the news nowadays, or any source for that matter. With all of the sources of information these days, I think people are starting to trust themselves to try and find the most reliable source....If they so wish to. It is those who want the truth of a matter that see the news of the world as a sort of puzzle. In order to get the big picture, people have to get the pieces of information from many sources, then lay it all out and put it together. I myself am skeptical of many news sources, but then again I am new to the interest to local and global issues. i believe the trust that people give to their information source of choice is highly swayed by their environment. Just as they say a person is a product of their upbringing, so too is the choice they make for obtaining news. Many people I think just want something to talk about at the water cooler, and take the news at entertainment value. I think that explains the style in which local and nationwide broadcasts are presented; fast paced, and friendly reoccurring characters. I think some are mistaking opinion based discussions as news, and perhaps follow the news that best suits their way of thinking, and choice of political view. This is why I believe it is hard to pinpoint exactly who a person trusts. I trust in public non-corporate sponsored news. I think it weeds out the motives, and censorship that tags along as interest on the loan. Although I am new to seeking out news, I think public, and non profit news sources are the organizations I trust until I get the hang of searching for the puzzle pieces myself. have a great day.
  • thumb

    Gerry Mann

    • +1
    May 1 2011: Understanding world events is a pretty tall order - I'm not sure that even with the wide variety of information and opinion channels that are available with today's technology that one can evaluate, synthesize and process the cacophony into understanding.

    Having said that, what I think I can do is recognize when something important has happened (i.e. the recent Japanese earthquake/tsunami/nuclear plant crisis) and try to determine what is important to me, what I want to know more about and how I want to participate/engage.

    For example, I know it's bad over in Japan just north of Tokyo in Sendai, but I don't know how bad. I'm not sure the experts know how bad it is or how bad it is going to get. I do know I've donated to the cause - but I still don't understand it and the influence these events will have on medicine, commerce, energy and so on.

    So, I use the internet, radio and media to recognize that something is happening. I then determine my own level of interest, and then research it. I'm not sure I see it as a matter of trust, except in my own ability to sift through the data and synthesize it into sometime I can make sense out of. Then finding others with similar interests to discuss it helps me vet my limited understanding.

    Thank you for an interesting question.
    • thumb

      Lindsay Newland Bowker 50+

      • 0
      May 1 2011: Hi Gerry..I think what you are doing is exactly what a responsible 'citizen of the worild" should do. and I admire it. Also the way you frame what you do points to a truth for most of us about international of global news..we tune in for the big events ( we all do the same) but day to day we are tuned in elsewhere. So what Elisa has told us in her wonderful talk, The news About The News ( Apologies if not exact title) about the shrinking foreign desks for major news outlets and the high interest in global news is explained quite simply. Those of us that are in the 32-50% who would answer yes on polls that we are interested in global news are interested in major international events so of course when the big events come down there is no one on the ground to cover it. Seems so obvious..now that you lay it out for us..can't man a foregin office for 5 years with epole becoming exprets on gistory and background just to be ready for that one big event that everyone is going to want to know everything about. So is that ok by you..that major news flags major international events for us and we have the option and opportunity to find out as much as we want from other sources?
      • thumb

        Gerry Mann

        • 0
        May 2 2011: Thank you for your comments Lindsay. My grandfather was a newpaperman (journalist, reporter, editor).

        It is clear that the information explosion is rapidly diluting the ranks of professional journalists. There simply aren't enough to go around.

        News was often framed by editors as was/is story selection. Bloggers have entered the picture with varying levels of journalistic expertise - making the sifting and analysis more challenging.

        You ask if I'm okay that major news organization flag major international events for us, and then we have the option to find out as much as we want from other sources?

        I don't like answering a question with a question, but I'm trying to think what my reasonable options are. I suppose I could go see for myself - I considered doing so with the aftermath of Katrina, but this is untenable for every event. The resources of our government can't put the Secretary of State at all major events. I suppose I could focus on a specific outlet, CNN or the Dallas Morning News, but I think this approach lacks balance.

        I think it's my responsibility to become informed in an as balanced a manner as practical.

        Thank you for the conversation.
        • thumb

          Lindsay Newland Bowker 50+

          • 0
          May 2 2011: Gerry..thank you for this and glad to put your very worthy comments in the context of your personal history..your grand dad a journalist. IWhat do you think your grand dad would say aboiut modern journalism? Even in my youth we really truly trusted people like Walter Cronkite..I think he was considered one of the most trusted journalists of all time. We don't have heroes like that any more.
  • thumb

    Lindsay Newland Bowker 50+

    • 0
    May 1 2011: JohnPerkins.org is an excellent example of "Citizens Journalism" on what he speaks he speaks from knowledge..through investigation..it isn't neutral..it just reports what it finds but it does bring to light the story behind the story as in todays article on Qadhaffi's ( the spelling I;ve chose over the many offered) plans to create a new gold currency and price oil only in that currency. He claims that Sadaam Hussein had announced the same plan in the lead up to our intervention in Iraq. Maenwhile all otger nedia are contiuing to report on Libya as it were still all about democacry and humanitartian aid. We need oher voices to shoe up the crumbling and blind fourth estate until it rights itself. ( I have just started a TED Conversation on the Implications of Perkins article today..please join http://www.ted.com/conversations/2497/what_would_happen_to_the_balan.html )
  • thumb

    Ted Barnes

    • +1
    Apr 30 2011: This is a very interesting question as I think a lot of world and especially my generation (mid 20s) have become too reliant on any source they can find. It has gotten to the point where you can spit out a lie and people start giving it as truths by way of word of mouth or virally (like Zeitgeist or Loose Change).

    So this brings us back to the question at hand. I think to some degree I still have to say the press but you must look at each important topic from all angles. For instance, don't just read NBC and say well I know what is going on now! I would suggest looking at BBC, original AP releases, Drudge, Al Jazeera, Fox, CNN and so on. I think in this day and age where we have access to so many different professional sources at the click of a button, there should be no excuse to being uninformed.

    To answer the last question. If you don't have time to think about it, then it would be counterproductive to spread around what you think you know without the proper research.
    • thumb

      Lindsay Newland Bowker 50+

      • 0
      May 1 2011: such an important point Ted and I am beginning to think this meme thing..this grabbing on to anyhting that "feels good" and running with it..spreading it as if it were knowledge..is tied up to the kind of "information vacuum" we live in as far as normal media are concerned. We can fill in the gaps ourselves..find out the truth ourselves..but it's very hard work..much easier just to sign up with some idea that resonates. I love your conclusion and agree completely:"If You don't have time to think about it, then it would be counterproductive to spread around what you think you know without proper research" But what's the anti dote for that..isn't apathy ( and I think what you are pointing to is an apathetic response) an indicator of political "disease".. of political and economic disenfranchisement and powerlessness..and what role can press have in changing that?. Is it important to have a reliable press that speak the truth..a press that we can trust?
  • thumb

    Lindsay Newland Bowker 50+

    • 0
    Apr 30 2011: I see that the Voice of America now has a "citizen's journalist" feature ( not real journalism..just blogs) but very interesting how the blog brings nuance, fills gaps, explores the unexplored even to VOA's own coverage. Does this/can this be useful in pointing to the gaps and errors in any coverage? Is that enough to prop up or supplment the challenged 4th estate?For resaons Alisa alreday presented in her Ted Talk the News About the News, most commenters here have commented they don't trust any single news source or journalist. Can Citizen's Journalism as modeled at Voice of America provide information that is trustworthy?
  • thumb

    Lindsay Newland Bowker 50+

    • 0
    Apr 30 2011: I just re re read this whole excellent conversation top to bottom..every comment every word and I see now that many who want to understand world news are finding ways to make up the shortfall of major news outlets. The question that is forming in me is can we afford not to have some universally acessible source of quality journalistic coverage on important world events? Can we really have a healthy vibrant democracy without a heathy vibrant fourth estate.? So what does the new generation fourth estate look like..surely it has to be more than individuals scarmbking to understand what they can of important world events.
  • thumb

    Lindsay Newland Bowker 50+

    • 0
    Apr 29 2011: I am so impressed with the caliber and discernment of this conversation. And agree with the growing consensus here that if we really want to know..we have do the work ourselves..I suggest that if we don't do it..if we just allow ourselves to "be comfortable" in the world of no news, half truths and straight out lies and memes we are facilitating the unthinkable all over this globe. It has always been the place of journalism to "let freedom ring" by telling the truth..by giving both sides accurately. Alisa has told us that isn't happening ..there's no one out there in the wolrd any more collecting facts on important international events.for big papers and news outlets here at home in the U.S. Its all cut and pasted from AP and Reuters.So there is no one to do it for us. Maybe through the internet, harnessed to the traditional values of journalism, we can build a world wide network of reliable news feeds on important emerging events and build the clearing houses to sort all that out and get it to "the street"..If not to this to what else does our "do it yourself " consensius point? Maybe this is the new way "we the citizens of the world" can be volunteers in service to the world. What I am doing at my own blog isn't that ..it's just my own record of what my own serach has found..but maybe there is a need and a way to elevate blogs into reliable newsfeeds.
Load more comments…