To more fully address widespread skepticism of journalism, it behooves journalism scholars and practitioners to understand how the public perceives “democracy’s detectives.” Yet there is limited research on what factors shape public opinion of investigative journalism. And the studies that do explore public evaluations of investigative journalism vary in terms of shedding light on what motivates perceptions of accountability journalism. Employing two U.S.-based, statewide survey datasets (N = 1077; N = 546), this research builds on existing scholarship by examining public perceptions of the news media’s importance, with a particular focus on investigative journalism. Consistent with prior research, this study suggests that journalism’s watchdog role generally remains highly valued with the American public. The research also confirms that beliefs about the value of investigative journalism correlate with the notions of how the news media serves democracy. Departing from prior research findings, however, this study demonstrates that political conservatism has a significant negative correlation with perceptions of investigative journalism, underscoring the polarized nature of attitudes about journalism. Notably, this study also highlights how individuals with a “need for evidence” to support their decisions and beliefs tend to have a higher regard for investigative journalism, indicating an alignment between investigative journalism’s epistemology and one’s personal epistemology.
A total of 1568 COVID-19 news articles from the three newspapers were analyzed. The findings indicated that the three newspapers bore similarities in reporting COVID-19 news during the movement restriction order. A majority of the COVID-19 news in The Jakarta Post, The Star, and Bangkok Post highlighted the government’s response measures based on news themes, with the government being their main source using responsibility attribution news frames in reporting.
