WASHINGTON—News coverage about technology in the 1980s and early 1990s was largely favorable, but the tone of tech reporting has gradually become more pessimistic in the past 20 years, according to a new report out today from the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF), the top-ranked U.S. science and tech-policy think tank.
Among the likely explanations for the trend, the study finds that the average frequency with which civil-society organizations were quoted making critical comments about technology-related topics rose from about 46 percent in the 1980s and 1990s to 77 percent in the years since. Likewise, the data show there has been a decided shift in the tone of commentary from academic sources—away from more neutral, objective, and scholarly analysis, toward more pointed, headline-grabbing critiques.
“The way the media portrays any given issue shapes public opinion about it, and that in turn shapes the course of policymaking. So it is important to ensure that technology coverage airs diverse perspectives without giving any side more weight than is warranted,” said Daniel Castro, ITIF’s vice president and the report’s co-author. “If technology reporting continues with the trend we’re seeing toward pessimistic—and in some cases technophobic—critiques, it will likely spur policymakers and the public to support even more unnecessary, unwarranted, or unwise policy interventions.”
ITIF conducted a textual analysis of 250 articles from The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, and The Washington Post from 1986 to 2013 to assess the tone of tech reporting. The findings show that coverage of technology in the 1980s and early 1990s was largely favorable, with a heavy focus on the economic and military advantages afforded by advancing technologies. In the late 1980s, in particular, there was a notable focus on the economic opportunities afforded by the developing technology sector and its offerings.
From the mid-1990s to 2013, the tone of tech reporting gradually shifted, with more articles highlighting the potential ill effects of technology: its displacement of face-to-face interaction, its role in environmental degradation, its threat to employment, and its failure to live up to some of the promises made on its behalf.
The authors argue that this rise in pessimistic coverage does not correspond to a real-world increase in the dangers of technology. Instead, they attribute the less favorable media portrayal of technology over time to two main causes. First, there has been a significant increase in the number of civil-society organizations and attention-seeking scholars focused on painting a threatening picture of technology. Second, news organizations are under increased financial pressure, and as a result, reporters may have less time and fewer resources to dig deep into technology issues. In addition, since media outlets generate revenue from page views, they have an incentive to pursue alarmist stories that generate clicks.
“Members of the media should continue to examine technology with a critical eye, but we hope they will also make sure to balance expert opinions and analysis on both sides of any given issue,” said Castro. “We also urge policymakers to be sensitive to the fact that public opinion about technology may be skewed by a distorted picture. They should base policy decisions on the substance of expert analysis rather than the heated rhetoric that often breaks through in the press.”
Read summary.
Read report.
