Digital media vs mainstream media: Exploring the influences of media exposure and information preference as correlates of media credibility

Abstract

Rapid advancements in new media technologies have empowered presumed inactive mass media consumers to become active content creators on digital media platforms. The overarching implication of this unprecedented opportunity on media credibility has continued to reverberate among researchers, media practitioners, and media users. This study, employing selective exposure and McLuhan's 'medium is the message' frameworks as theoretical underpinnings, examined the influence of media exposure pattern and information preferences on perception of mainstream and digital media credibility among the University of Ibadan undergraduates. Cross sectional survey and focus group discussions (FGDs) served as the study designs while cluster probability and purposive sampling techniques were employed to select respondents and discussants who participated in the study. Analysis of both quantitative and qualitative data revealed that the mainstream media were adjudged more credible despite heavier dependency on digital media for information. Frequency of media exposure and information preferences on both media platforms have predictive influences on respondents’ credibility evaluation. Specifically, one of the significant conclusions of the study is that audience credibility judgement, predicted by frequent exposure and choice of content consumption, are grounded on the awareness of the implicit nature of media platforms.

Keywords:

• digital/mainstream media
• citizen/mainstream journalism
• Nigerian media
• media exposure
• information preference
• media credibility

PUBLIC INTEREST STATEMENT

With the limitless amount of information disseminated daily by both mainstream and digital media, the unprecedented rise in misinformation and fake news, there are growing concerns among Nigerian media audience about the authenticity of these information and the reliability of the media platforms through which they are disseminated. This study therefore examined audience evaluation of the credibility of both media platforms and investigated how media exposure pattern and audience information preferences influence their perception. Findings revealed that mainstream media platforms were adjudged as more credible despite more frequent usage of digital media. Results also showed that audience perceived credibility of both media platforms were, to a large extent, influenced by their media exposure pattern and information preferences. This research concludes that audience skepticism about mass media credibility, as exemplified by the overall mediocre ratings, are grounded by the awareness of the strengths and flaws of Nigerian mainstream and digital media platforms.

1. Introduction

Until a few decades ago, mainstream news media—Newspapers, Magazines, Radio and Television—were the major channels of information dissemination and mass-mediated messages, with trained professional journalists serving exclusively as disseminators of news and information. This exclusivity enjoyed by the mainstream media and professional journalists, however, came to a halt with the arrival new media technologies (Bruns et al., 2012). News and information, which hitherto, reached the public only after undergoing professional scrutiny and careful gatekeeping, now, reach the public within seconds of happening as a result of the ubiquity of the Internet (Jurrat, 2011). Armed with internet-connected devices, ordinary citizens who were predominantly media consumers became active creators of media contents (Bowman & Willis, 2003). These journalistic endeavours undertaken by non-professionals have been termed “citizen journalism” and the platforms through which these contents are disseminated are referred to as digital media, online media, or new media (Bowman & Willis, 2003; Dare, 2011).

With the arrival of digital media came an influx of user-generated contents which seem to compete with contents from the mainstream media (Jack, 2010), in terms of speed of dissemination, ease of accessibility and ubiquity of use. Also, the bottom-up and interactive nature of the online media seems to challenge the top-down and hegemonic structure of the conventional media (Kramp, 2015). These variations in nature, structure and practice of digital media and mainstream media have generated a wide array of interest and concerns among different populations of the society. While media practitioners are locked in a debate about the ethics and professionalism of these media platforms (Keen, 2007), media consumers are concerned about the authenticity of the limitless information emanating daily from these media platforms (Banda, 2010). The flood of information generated daily by both mainstream and digital media, especially in the Nigerian media sphere, has left doubts in the minds of the Nigerian audience as to the authenticity of these information and the reliability of the media platforms that generate them. With the rapid advances in new media technologies, rise of partisan reporting and rampant presence of fake news, the need to investigate public perception of media credibility has assumed new social relevance and historical urgency.

The divergent views about the professional practice of journalism in mainstream media and digital media, as well as the perception of the credibility of information disseminated by these two media platforms have been the focus of many media and communication researchers. Over the years, empirical investigations about audience perception of the credibility and professionalism of mainstream media and digital media have yielded confounding results as some reveal that digital media are perceived as more credible (Johnson & Kaye, 1998; Wilson et al., 2011), while others reveal the opposite (Kiousis, 2001; Kovaic et al., 2010; Mehrabi et al., 2009). Other researchers have explored the possible association between audience exposure to the media and their perception of media credibility and trustworthiness (Tsfati, 2010; Tsfati & Cappella, 2005; William, 2012).

Although previous research established a correlation between media exposure and perception of credibility, little scholarly attention has been paid to how information preference might influence media credibility judgements and perception of news and information on mainstream and digital media. The aim of this paper, therefore, is to contribute to this research area by investigating the influence of exposure patterns of the Nigerian audience to both mainstream media and digital media, as well as their information preference on their perception of digital and mainstream media credibility. By examining information preference as a moderator in the relationship between media exposure pattern and perception of media credibility, this paper investigates how information audience prefer to access on both media platforms influence their perception of credibility on both platforms.

1.1. Media exposure and perception of media credibility

Over the years, scholars have empirically tracked trends on public’s opinion about the credibility of different media platforms and factors influencing public perception. While earlier investigations conducted in the pre-internet era show that perception of media credibility is majorly influenced by media literacy and demographic factors like; age, gender and level of education, (Mulder, 1981; Robinson & Kohut, 1988), studies on this subject matter, since the advent of digital media, have shown that media credibility perception among the public are contingent upon factors such as interpersonal discussion, media use (Bucy, 2003; Kiousis, 2001), media exposure (Tsfati & Cappella, 2003; Wanta & Hu, 1994), political ideology, and partisanship (Lee, 2010), and religious disposition (Golan & Anita Day, 2010).

More recently, with the multiplicity of media organisations and the proliferation news outlets, the media audience have never been more inundated with numerous choices of media platforms and media contents, resulting in wide-spread skepticism about the authenticity of media platforms and the veracity information they churn out (Banda, 2010). This recent phenomenon has sparked renewed interest in media credibility research. Literature suggest that people tend to pay more attention to media platforms they trust and consume media contents that align with their predispositions, while avoiding media they distrust (Kiousis, 2001; Tsfati & Cappella, 2003), affirming the principle of selective exposure.

Exploring the possible associations between mistrust in mainstream news media and consumption of online news, Tsfati (2010), argued that trust in a particular medium is associated with exposure to such medium. He found a strong relationship between exposure to mainstream media and trust in the media, while consumption of nonmainstream news was correlated with media skepticsm. William (2012) provided evidence that attention to news correlates with audience trust in message, source, and the media. Similarly, an investigation on the influence of mass media use on media trust conducted by Hopmann et al. (2015), revealed that the use of specific media types leads to more trust in those media, confirming the findings of earlier studies on the effect of media exposure on audience trust of the mass media (Kiousis, 2001; Tsfati & Cappella, 2003, 2005; Wanta & Hu, 1994).

While these studies have significantly increased understanding of the influence of media exposure on audience attitude towards the media, there is an inconsistency in the operationalization of media trust as a variable. Many of these studies conceptualized media trust with respect to confidence in and reliance on media platforms, (e.g. Hopmann et al., 2015; Tsfati, 2010; Tsfati & Cappella, 2003, 2005; William, 2012), while other studies discuss media trust based on perception of accuracy of media coverage (e.g. Kiousis, 2001; Wanta & Hu, 1994). This conceptual irregularity between media trust and media credibility has been a consistent limitation in media credibility research (Hellmueller & Trilling, 2012), resulting in methodological inaccuracies (Guo, 2018).

Although both concepts share some underlying overlaps, evaluations of trust in the media and perception of media credibility are conceptually distinct. According to Hellmueller and Trilling (2012), trust research depends on the societal functions of the media, while credibility research rely more on interpersonal factors. Guo (2018) further explained that the semantic distinction between both concepts are quite pronounced such that a disregard in usage could distort the measurement of media performance evaluation. The present research distinguishes between the two concepts by focusing on audience perception of media credibility. In the context of this study, media credibility is defined as the evaluation of the believability and reliability of the media based on the accuracy, factuality, fairness, and balance of their content.

1.2. Media credibility research in Nigeria

Evaluations of media credibility and the factors that influence credibility perception have mostly been observed from the perspective of the western audience. The few studies on media credibility in Nigeria have only investigated audience assessment of the performance of different media platforms, yielding differing results. Skepticism about the believability of mass media have been attributed to the ownership pattern of media organizations in the country. On the one hand, government-owned media are considered as instruments of propaganda (Udeajah, 2004), on the other hand, individual-owned media are accused of serving the interest of their owners (Duyile, 2005). With the emergence of digital media, audience were provided an alternative source of information that rivalled conventional media platforms. Literature, however, suggest that online media platforms are not only undermining the exclusivity of traditional media in the Nigerian media sphere but are also shifting audience attention away from mainstream media platforms (Dare, 2011).

Consequently, the growing spate of fake news, fabricated news reports and hate speech have called into question the credibility of both mainstream and digital media in the country, prompting a handful of empirical investigations into audience assessment of the credibility of Nigerian mainstream and online media. A study examining the objectivity of news reporting among online news media in Nigeria, conducted by Akpan et al. (2012) revealed that majority of online news stories are not objectively reported. Another local study conducted by Edogor et al. (2015), investigating the credibility of social media sites, showed that users rate social media platforms as credible sources of information, with Facebook adjudged as the most credible.

Focusing on audience trust in the mainstream media, Udende et al. (2014) found out that private-owned media are more trusted than those controlled by the government because state-owned media are perceived as the mouthpiece of the government. Adeyanju’s (2015) comparative analysis of audience assessment of the credibility of social media and the mainstream media corroborate the findings of earlier studies. He found that social media were rated as more credible than mainstream media because of the participatory nature of social media platforms and the ownership influence associated with mainstream media outlets. However, a more recent cross-national study by Wasserman and Madrid-Morales (2019) on fake news and media trust in Nigeria, Kenya and South Africa, provide evidence of a significant relationship between high exposure to disinformation and lower levels of trust in news media across all three African countries.

While these studies provide an understanding about how mainstream media and social media platforms in Nigeria are evaluated, these studies have overlooked the perceived credibility of other digital media platforms like; online news websites, weblogs and collaborative sites, which also serve as sources of news and information to many Nigerians (Dare, 2011). Furthermore, extant research on media credibility in Nigeria have failed to identify some of the underlying factors that might shape people’s perception.

1.3. Selective exposure, media characteristics and information preference

The proliferation of mainstream media organisations provide people with the choice of selecting the media that meet their personal needs and the advent of digital media exponentially increased these choices (Bruns et al., 2012). While earliest media studies portray media audience as passive receivers who are at the mercy of the media and often controlled by media messages, (Katz & Lazarsfeld, 1955), recent scholarships have challenged this previous notion, arguing that the audience are indeed active consumers who decide the media messages to pay attention to, birthing communication theories like; uses and gratification and selective exposure theories (Katz et al., 1973). Research applying the uses and gratification approach have documented the active role the audience members and have provided a basis for understanding the reasons behind audience choice to use the media (Defleur & Ball-Rokeach, 1989).

Literature focusing on selective exposure suggest that individuals actively choose the media they use and intentionally select media content they pay attention to. The concept of selective exposure which was theoretically grounded by Festinger’s (1957) cognitive dissonance theory, is the assumption that people expose themselves to media content that reinforce their pre-existing beliefs, while avoiding information that negates their pre-existing views. This theory posits that people make a deliberate effort in selecting and avoiding media platform and media content based on their personal choices and preferences, thus, conferring the power of choice on media audience rather than the mass media. However, studies have revealed that while audience may be able to consciously attend to information that confirms their pre-existing beliefs, they inadvertently get exposed to disagreeable information (Stroud, 2011; Tewksbury et al., 2001; Valentino et al., 2009).

These unintentional and incidental exposure, according to Weeks et al. (2017), provide a stronger motivation for media audience to seek out more attitude-reinforcing information. The theory of selective exposure lays emphasis on the selective choices and preferences of individuals. With the numerous media outlets available for information and entertainment, people access online and traditional media platforms for different reasons and purposes, which is determined by their personal choices and preferences (Daramola, 2003). For example, an individual may prefer to access political news content from newspapers or television and choose to get entertainment information from social media sites or weblogs.

Furthermore, the structure and characteristic of both mainstream media and digital media may play a role in the choice of information audience pay attention to on both platforms, which may inadvertently affect their evaluation about the level reliability on both platforms. This phenomenon is explained by the “medium is the message” theory, a concept coined by Marshall McLuhan (1964) to explain relationship between the characteristics of the media and how they affect people’s attitudes and experiences. Medium is the message theory assumes that channels of communication “differ not only in terms of their content, but also in regard to how they awaken and alter thoughts and senses … thereby affecting perception” (Gross, 2011, n.a).

Thus, based on the assumptions of the selective exposure and the “medium is the message” theories, this paper argues that judgement about the reliability of a media platform is to a large extent, determined by audience pre-existing knowledge about the platform’s mode of operation. This paper also posits that the characteristics of a medium through which information is disseminated are predictive of the way it is perceived by the audience. The following research questions were used to guide the research.

RQ1: What is the exposure pattern of university students to digital news media and mainstream news media?

RQ2: What types of information do university students prefer to access on mainstream media and digital media?

RQ3: What is perception of university students about the credibility of news and information on mainstream media and on digital media?

RQ4a: To what extent are university students’ evaluations of news and information on mainstream and digital media predicted by their exposure pattern to both media platforms?

RQ4b: To what extent are university students’ evaluations of news and information on mainstream and digital media predicted by their information preference on both media platforms?

2. Methods

A combination of quantitative method, using survey, and qualitative method, using Focus Group Discussion (FGD), was employed as research design. Data were collected using questionnaire and focus group discussion guide. While survey data provided us with individual-level opinion about the credibility of mainstream and digital media, data from the FGDs helped us understand the factors behind respondents’ perception about the two media platforms.

2.1. Sampling

Undergraduates of University of Ibadan, Nigeria were chosen as the population of this study because majority of students in tertiary institutions are technologically savvy, news conscious and are mostly audience and users of digital media and mainstream media. Cluster probability sampling technique was used to randomly select the three faculties and the six departments in the university from where the final participants were selected. Next, purposive sampling was used to select a final sample size of (n = 264) across the randomly selected departments. For the survey, (n = 240) respondents were purposively selected across the six selected departments. Ten (10) respondents were selected from each academic level (first year to fourth year), making a total of (n = 40) respondents from each selected department. The choice of selecting 40 respondents from each of the selected departments was informed by the need to give equal chances of participation to all the departments. The completion rate in the survey was 100% with 43.3% male and 56.7% female respondents. The respondents’ ages ranged from 16 to 20 years (37%), 21 to 25 years (46.7%), 26 years and above (16.3%). For the FGD, four respondents were selected from each randomly selected department—one from each academic level—making a total of (n = 24) respondents who participated in the FGDs. Four discussion sessions consisting of six discussants in each session were conducted. The participants comprised 12 males and 12 females whose ages ranged from 20 to 25 years.

2.2. Variable measurement

The independent and dependent variables of this study were measured as follows:

Media Exposure: Several items in the questionnaire were used to measure the exposure pattern of respondents to different platforms on both mainstream media and digital media. Respondents were asked the following questions “Do you access news and information from the following mainstream media platforms?” and were provided with the following responses (1 = Newspaper, 2 = Magazine, 3 = Radio, 4 = Television); “Do you access news and information from the following digital media platforms?” and were provided with the following responses (1 = Weblogs, 2 = Social media sites, 3 = Online news websites). The frequency of respondents’ mainstream and digital media use was also measured by asking them how often they access news and information from both mainstream and digital media. Response categories ranged from (1 = everyday; 2 = 5 to 6 days a week; 3 = 3 to 4 days a week; 4 = 1 to 2 days a week).

Information Preference: To measure the type of information respondents prefer to access on both mainstream and digital media, they were first asked what type of information they usually access on mainstream and digital media. Response options, which respondents were asked to choose as many as applied to them, are: News, Education, Economy, Politics, Science, Health, Religion, Sports, Entertainment, All types of information. Then, respondents were asked which information they mostly prefer to access on the mainstream media and digital media. Response options, which they were asked to select one, are: News, Education, Economy, Politics, Science, Health, Religion, Sports, Entertainment.

Media Credibility Perception: Before measuring the perceived credibility of mainstream and digital media, we first examined the criteria with which respondents evaluate media credibility by asking them which factors they use to judge the credibility of news and information. They were told to select as many as applicable from the following options (Accuracy, Factual, Comprehensiveness, Fairness, Objectivity, Believability, Timeliness, Trustworthiness, Currency, Balance). Respondents were then asked to rate the credibility of both mainstream and digital media based on the credibility factors they selected. The responses were (1 = highly credible, 2 = fairly credible, 3 = not credible). Next, we measured the perception of respondents about the credibility of news and information on both mainstream and digital media. This was achieved using a 10-item credibility measurement scale partly adopted from Gaziano and McGrath (1986) credibility scale. The items include the following statements; “News and information on mainstream/digital media are accurate”; “News and information on mainstream/digital media are factual”; “News and information on mainstream/digital media are trustworthy”; “News and information on mainstream media are free of external control”. Respondents were asked to indicate their level of agreement or disagreement with each statement on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = strongly agree, 5 = strongly disagree). Scores of the credibility factors were summed into a credibility index. The reliability test for the credibility measurement scale was (Cronbach’s α =.85).

2.3. Data analysis

The survey data were analysed using Pearson correlation analysis. First, descriptive statistics was used to ascertain the exposure pattern of respondents to mainstream and digital media. Next, multiple regression analysis was conducted to examine the relationship between respondents’ media exposure pattern and their perception of mainstream/digital media credibility, as well as to examine the correlation between respondents’ information preference and their perception of both media platforms. Responses from the FGD were recorded, transcribed verbatim and reviewed by the first author. Based on the research questions, the transcribed data were thematically analysed; major themes were developed and were coded according to key areas of interest.

3. Results

In this section, first, we provide the descriptive statistics tracing the exposure pattern of respondents to the different mainstream and digital media platforms as well as their information preferences on both media platforms vis a vis the responses for the Focus Group Discussion. Next, we present correlational evidence explaining the relationship between respondents’ media exposure pattern, their information preference, and their evaluations of mainstream and digital media credibility.

3.1. Exposure pattern to mainstream and digital media platforms

Results from the descriptive analysis showed that of all the mainstream media platforms, radio is the most used as majority of respondents (88.3%) access news and information on radio. A large percentage of the respondents (85.4%) also said they access news and information on television, 67.5% noted that they obtain news from newspapers, while 55.8% affirmed that they do get information from magazines. Findings showing the usage of digital media platforms reveal that social media sites are the most used platforms as 92.9% respondents indicated obtaining information from them, 85.4% access news and information from weblogs, while 56.3% access news and information from online news websites.

Thus, to answer RQ1 which sought to examine the exposure pattern of undergraduate students to mainstream news media and digital news media, findings, as shown in Table 1 reveal that 47.1% of the respondents are frequent users of mainstream media, 17.1% are average users, while 35.8% of respondents are less frequent users of mainstream media. Results also show that 52.9% of respondents use digital media frequently, 22.5% of respondents are average users of digital media, while 24.6% of respondents do not use digital media frequently. Based on the above result, it can be deduced that respondents access news and information on digital media more regularly than they do on mainstream media.

Table 1. Frequency of respondents’ usage of mainstream and digital media

	Respondents’ Media Usage (%)
Per Week	Mainstream Media	Digital Media
Everyday	36.7 %	41.7 %
5–6 days a week	10.4%	11.2 %
3–4 days a week	17.1%	22.5 %
1–2 days a week	35.8 %	24.6%

Similarly, out of the 24 participants who took part in the FGD, only four (4) participants affirmed that they regularly access news and information from the mainstream media, while 20 (twenty) participants stated that they occasionally access news and information from the mainstream media. One the other hand, 18 (eighteen) participants affirmed that they obtain news and information from the digital media daily, while the remaining six participants said that they occasionally access news and information from the mainstream media. This goes to show that majority of the respondent and participants frequently use the digital media to access news and information more than the mainstream media. Furthermore, the responses of participants during the FGD shows that most of the students prefer to access news and information on digital media because of its easy accessibility, its affordability, its timeliness, and currency of information dissemination. However, those who prefer to access news and information on mainstream media highlighted professionalism, authenticity, and reliability as the reasons for their preference.

3.2. Information preference of respondents on mainstream and digital media

Findings show that almost all the respondents (98.3%) access all types of information on both mainstream media and digital media. However, further examination revealed that respondents’ information preference on mainstream media differ from that of digital media. Data, as presented in Table 2 shows that News (55.4%) is the most preferred type of information respondents access on mainstream media, while Entertainment (14.2%) comes second as the most preferred information on mainstream media, while political information (9.6%) comes third. However, the remaining 10% prefer to get other types of information on mainstream media. Findings further show that contrary to the mainstream media, Entertainment (60%) is the most preferred information respondents access on digital media, while News (17.5%) comes as second.

Table 2. Information preference of respondents on mainstream and digital media

	Information Preference (%)
Information Type	Mainstream Media	Digital Media
News	55.4%	17.5%
Education	5.8%	5.4%
Economy	3.8%	2%
Politics	9.6%	3.3%
Science	4.2%	2%
Health	1.3%	1.6%
Religion	1.3%	0.8%
Sports	4.6%	7.1%
Entertainment	14.2%	60%

The result above is supported by responses of the FGD participants as 23 of them stated that news is the information they mostly prefer to access on mainstream media, while 18 out of the 24 discussants confirmed that the type of information they mostly prefer to access on the digital media is entertainment. From the analysis of both quantitative and qualitative data, it can be inferred that mainstream media is mostly used to access news information, while digital media is mostly accessed to get entertainment information. This shows that even though majority of the respondents spend more time accessing the digital media, they still turn to the mainstream media for news and important issues. Findings further reveal that respondents’ preference for news on mainstream media and entertainment on digital media is as a result of the differences in nature and features of the two media platforms as well as the method of dissemination of information on the two media platforms. The participants stated that mainstream media are organised and have institutional processes dedicated to disseminating verified information, while the interactive and unstructured nature of digital media is more suited to entertainment and soft news.

3.3. Credibility perception about mainstream and digital media

To answer RQ3, we first ascertained the criteria that the respondents used in assessing media credibility. Results show that almost all the respondents (98.8%) rate credibility of news and information in the mass media based on factors such as: Accuracy, Factual, Comprehensiveness, Fairness, Objectivity, Believability, Timeliness, Trustworthiness, Currency and Balance. Then, an analysis of respondents’ evaluations about the credibility of mainstream media platforms and digital media platforms as presented in Figure 1 shows that half of the respondents (50.4%) rate mainstream media as highly credible, while less than half of the respondents (20.8%) of the respondents rate digital media as highly credible. From the above data, it can be inferred that majority of respondents evaluate mainstream media as more credible than digital media.

Figure 1. Showing respondents’ rating of mainstream media and digital media credibility

Figure 2. Graphical representation of the relationship between media exposure, information preference and perceived media credibility

Note: Numbers show statistical relationship where p <.05

Findings from the FGD data corroborate survey results as 22 discussants opined that mainstream media are more credible than digital media while only two participants differed. Participants who rated mainstream media as more credible cited the principle of accountability and adherence to journalistic ethics and codes as some of the reasons for judging mainstream media to be more credible. One of the participants, a 23-year-old third-year student said “ … practitioners of mainstream media don’t just report anything that they want. They consider the code of conduct guiding them but on the digital media, anybody can post whatever they want without verifying the veracity”. On the contrary, two other discussants stated that the interactivity feature of digital media and freedom enjoyed by contributors on digital media make the platform more credible than mainstream media. They noted that digital media are free of governmental control, hence, they present accurate and objective information while mainstream media serve the interest of their owners. Based on the foregoing, it can be deduced that University of Ibadan undergraduates consider mainstream media more credible than digital media because of the professional nature of mainstream media.

Furthermore, using the previously highlighted credibility factors as a yardstick for measuring news and information credibility, analysis of respondents’ perception about the credibility of news and information disseminated on both mainstream media and digital media reveals that news and information on mainstream media is considered more credible than that of digital media. Out of a possible mean of 50, the overall mean index score for news and information credibility on mainstream media is 25.48 (SD = 6.25), indicating that respondents find mainstream media content moderately credible. Results, as presented in Table 3 show that respondents rated accuracy (M = 2.87, SD = 1.27); authenticity (M = 2.85; SD = 1.08) and trustworthiness (M = 2.73, SD = 1.19) of news and information the highest, while freedom from control (M = 1.76, SD = .85) was rated the lowest. Findings further reveal that news and information on digital media was judged less credible with an overall mean index score of 21.66 (SD = 4.42). While the freedom from control (M = 2.80, SD = 1.28); unbiased reportage (M = 2.75; SD = 1.20) and currency (M = 2.60; SD = 1.08) of information on digital media are rated highest, the accuracy (M = 1.65, SD = .78); authenticity (M = 1.32, SD = .73) and trustworthiness (M = 1.20, SD = .71) of digital media content have low ratings.

Table 3. Means of credibility factors and credibility index overall (n = 240)

	Information on MM		Information on DM
Credibility Factors	Mean	SD	Mean	SD
Accurate	2.87	1.27	1.65	.78
Factual	2.47	1.08	2.12	.821
Objective	2.54	1.06	2.41	1.05
Unbiased	2.64	1.20	2.75	1.20
Trustworthy	2.73	1.19	1.20	.71
Reliable	2.65	1.21	2.41	1.07
Authentic	2.85	1.08	1.32	.73
Comprehensive	2.57	.94	2.40	1.03
Current	2.40	.83	2.60	1.08
Free of Control	1.76	.85	2.80	1.28

Similarly, 22 discussants opined that news and information on mainstream media are more credible than digital media contents, citing originality, professionalism, authenticity, comprehensiveness of mainstream contents, among others as the reasons for their opinion, although many of the participants were sceptical about ownership influence on mainstream media. According to Olamide, a 20-year-old second-year student, news on mainstream media is more credible because “professional journalists take time to investigate their stories, so they are reliable; they don’t just jump into news stories. There is also balance in writing their news reports, although sometimes they may reflect the owners’ bias”. Grace, a fourth-year student also added “I feel mainstream media is very credible in terms of currency and timeliness. But in terms of objectivity, I would give them 50% because some news stations may be influenced by their owners”. As for their low credibility perception of news and information on digital media, majority of the participants cited unprofessionalism, anonymity, and sensationalism of news reports as reasons. Alex, a fourth-year student however noted that sensationalism of stories is the main reason why he thinks news and information on digital media are less credible. He explained:

Well, I believe news and information on mainstream media as being more credible because professional journalists take time to get their information and to get their news out. They work on it and try to get the necessary details. But for the digital media, I think citizen journalists only ride on the back of sensationalism to boost traffic to their site. They don’t really get the fact; they don’t try to get to the root of the matter or verify their information before they just give it out to the audience. They just give out what they feel is interesting just to boost their own site.

However, only two discussants disagreed with the majority by stating that digital media contents are more credible than mainstream media contents. They noted that easy accessibility, objectivity, and lack of external influence are reasons why news and information on digital media are more credible. One of the two discussants, Olatunde, a first-year student explained the reason for his position thus: “To me, news on digital media are more credible because they are not manipulated or falsified unlike mainstream media who sometimes give inaccurate figures especially of victims or causalities in a disaster”. Expressing a similar view, Emmanuel, who is in his third year, stated:

Information on digital media are more credible because those that post information there reveal the truth, they expose information which might otherwise be unpublished by the mainstream media. The news on mainstream media is under the control of the government or the media owners who decide on what the public should and should not know.

3.4. Relationship between media exposure and perception of mainstream and digital media credibility

A regression analysis conducted to ascertain the relationship between respondents’ exposure pattern to the media and their perception of mainstream media shows a positive significant coefficient (p = .014). With p < .05, exposure to mass media emerged as a positive predictor of perception of mainstream media credibility. However, further analysis yielded a significant negative (p = -.05) relationship between media exposure pattern and perception of digital media credibility (See Figure 2), showing that higher exposure to the mass media is associated with lower credibility perception of digital media.

The above findings were supported by qualitative data generated from the FGD. All the 24 discussants affirmed that accessing news and information on both mainstream and digital media greatly influenced how they perceive the credibility of news and information on both media platforms as it exposed them to the strengths and limitations of mainstream and digital media, particularly with respect to their nature and mode of operation. According to the participants, the frequent usage of digital media made them more aware of its editorial porosity, compared to the strict gatekeeping mechanism that is a paramount feature of mainstream media operation. Furthermore, the discussants noted that high exposure to digital media made them conversant with some other peculiarities of the nature of digital media like; the lack of institutional restraints, anonymity of contributors, virality of unverified information, which when compared to mainstream media, skews credibility judgement against digital media. For example, one participant, Samuel, a third-year student said:

I see the way news is reported on TV and newspapers with verifiable sources, which assures me of its trustworthiness. On digital media, however, lots of stories have no sources and those that do have sources cannot be verified. This limits my confidence in its reliability.

Thus, these findings indicate that exposure to both media platforms increases awareness to the nature and modus operandi of both platforms which inadvertently contributes to their credibility judgement.

3.5. Relationship between information preference and perception of mainstream and digital media credibility

A correlation analysis reveals that the relationship between respondents’ information preference and their perception of mainstream and digital media credibility is statistically significant. Results, as presented in Figure 2, shows there is a positive association between respondents’ information preference on mainstream media and their perception of mainstream media credibility (p = .001). Likewise, findings show a positive significant relationship between information preference on digital media and perception of digital media credibility (p ˂.005).

Analysis of the FGD data reveal that the participants’ preference for accessing news on mainstream media and entertainment information on digital media is not only based on the nature and practice of both media platforms, but also on discussants’ pre-existing beliefs about both media platforms. For example, one of the participants, Janet, who is in her first year, said “I would rather get my news from TV, newspaper or radio because I know they are trained professionals. But the unrestricted atmosphere of digital media makes it the best place for me to get juicy gossips”. Another discussant, Subomi, a 24-year-old fourth-year student noted:

I know that 90 percent of whatever information I’m getting from the online media could be half-baked because I’ve always had the belief that real and factual news can only be obtained from mainstream media. So, when I see a story online, I still need to go on the mainstream media to verify the information.

4. Discussion

The purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of media exposure and information preference on perception of mainstream and digital media credibility. To examine this relationship, this study first, examined the exposure pattern of mainstream and digital media among University of Ibadan undergraduates. The findings reveal that although students usually access news and information on both media platforms, they however, use the digital media more frequently than they use mainstream media. From the focus group discussions, we found that students access information from mainstream media because of the perceived professionalism, authenticity, and reliability of traditional news platforms. Despite this argument in favour of mainstream media, majority of students still use the digital media more often than they use the mainstream media. The reason for the preference for digital media, according to the FGD participants is because of the accessibility, affordability, and ubiquity of the platform as well as the timeliness and currency of information on digital media. This result, corroborating the findings of Wilson et al. (2011) on mainstream and digital media usage, provides evidence of a growing shift of audience attention from mainstream media and an increasing reliance on digital media as sources of news and information.

Furthermore, this study revealed that respondents access specific types of information from mainstream media and digital media. Results showed that students use the digital media majorly to access entertainment information and soft news, while they use the mainstream media to access serious news and to verify information obtained from the digital media. This finding provides further elucidation for the higher exposure pattern to digital media. Given that the participants of this study are young university students, their information preferences lean more towards entertainment and showbiz than to serious news and political issues, hence they are inclined to access digital media more frequently than mainstream media. This result also supports the assumption of selective exposure theory which proposes that people tend to pay more attention to media messages and media platforms based on their pre-existing beliefs, interests, and preferences (Festinger, 1957). From this finding, it was deduced that participants pay more attention to digital media because of their preferences for entertainment while still accessing mainstream media—albeit less often—because of their belief that information from traditional news outlets are more reliable.

Consistent with previous research about the criteria for evaluating media credibility, this study found that students judge mass media credibility based on factors such as: accuracy, fact, comprehensiveness, fairness, objectivity, believability, timeliness, trustworthiness, currency, balance, and source attribution. Scholars agree that the above qualities are what the media—mainstream or digital—should possess as they are what the audience expect in every news and information (Appleman & Sundar, 2016; Gaziano & McGrath, 1986; Meyer, 1988). Thus, using these highlighted credibility factors as a yardstick for measuring media and media content credibility, it was observed that majority of the participants rate mainstream media and their content as more credible than digital media and their content. While research investigating audiences’ perception about the performance of mainstream media and digital media have divergent conclusions, large proportion of these studies provide evidence that people generally trust mainstream media more than digital media (Kiousis, 2001; Kovaic et al., 2010; Mehrabi et al., 2009). Although the result of the present study tilts towards this general direction, it was found that participants were equally apprehensive about the believability of mainstream media on the grounds of governmental censorship as well as ownership and advertisers’ influence.

The study further revealed that majority of participants have positive perception about news and information on mainstream media because of their long-held belief that traditional news outlets are organised platforms where trained journalists provide verified information whose sources are properly attributed. The fact-checking and gatekeeping mechanism boosts audiences’ confidence in mainstream media. However, this confidence in the reliability of mainstream media is challenged by ownership control of the media, as participants expressed dissatisfaction that mainstream media platforms often serve as mouthpieces of their owners, thereby restricting journalistic freedom. On the other hand, participants’ poor perception of digital media is attributed to the informality of news dissemination as well as the anonymity of contributors on digital media space. This anonymity of online contributors is identified as one of the downsides of citizen journalism. According to Jurrat (2011) critics of citizen journalism pointed out that the anonymity of those who post information online makes it difficult to ascertain the truthfulness such information since they cannot be held responsible for their publication.

Examining the association between media exposure and perception of mainstream and digital media credibility, the study found that respondents’ exposure to mainstream and digital media is predictive of their perception about both media platforms. On the one hand, it was observed that there was a positive significant relationship between exposure to mainstream media and perception of mainstream media credibility. On the other hand, findings showed a negative significant association between exposure to digital media and perception of digital media. This result indicates that participants who frequently access information on mainstream media, tend to have higher perception about the credibility of mainstream media, while those who often use digital media have lower perception about the credibility of digital media. Based on an initial finding that respondents access digital media more frequently than mainstream media, it was observed that the usage frequency of both media platforms exposed the participants to the nature, characteristics, and features of both platforms, which inadvertently, influenced their evaluations of the performance of both platforms.

Although the above-stated finding is consistent with previous studies that provide evidence that media exposure relates to audience trust in the media (Kiousis, 2001; Tsfati, 2010; William, 2012), the present study extends previous observations by providing evidence of cognitive interplay. It was deduced that the constant and frequent exposure to mainstream and digital media made the participants became conversant with the nature, techniques and practices of these two media platforms; and with that, they were able to draw inferences about the credibility of these two platforms. This affirms the postulation of Marshall McLuhan’s ‘Medium is the Message’ Theory which states that the mass medium through which information is carried plays a vital role in the way it is perceived (Gross, 2011). Thus, by accessing information on digital media and mainstream media, students were able to decipher and weigh the strengths and limitations of both media platforms.

Furthermore, analysis of the association between information preference and perception of media credibility shows a positive significant relationship, suggesting that the type of information participants access on mainstream media and digital media has an effect on the way they evaluate both platforms, Given that majority of the participants mostly prefer to access news on mainstream media and entertainment information on digital media, it was further revealed that these preferences are based on participants’ beliefs about both media platforms as well as on the nature of both media platforms. The FGD discussants noted that their preference for news on mainstream media and entertainment on digital media is informed by their belief that mainstream media is organised and professional in nature, while digital media is more informal and less institutional in nature. Thus, it was inferred that this belief contributes to participants’ evaluation of the credibility of mainstream and digital media. Hence, it can be concluded that while exposure and information preference did influence students’ perception of mainstream and digital media credibility, the nature and characteristics of the two media platforms did contribute to students’ credibility perception.

5. Conclusion and recommendations

Although digital media has taken centre stage in the Nigerian media sphere and is competing favourably with mainstream media—as evidenced in this study, traditional news outlets remain veritable sources of news and information for many Nigerians. While the higher credibility ratings accorded to mainstream media might be encouraging to mainstream journalists, it is however important to note the overall mediocre ratings of news and information on both mainstream and digital media, which suggests that there are still major scepticisms about the performances and reliability of both sources of information. Participants highlighted owners’ bias and lack of press freedom as a lapse in mainstream media, while inaccuracy and lack of professional standards were highlighted as some of the shortcomings of digital media. In the light of this, this study recommends the intervention of press regulatory bodies and media accountability systems in ensuring high professional and ethical standards among mainstream journalists and contributors of user-generated contents on digital media. While this study has been able to answer some questions regarding the credibility perception of Nigerian media, a replication of this study among a larger and more heterogeneous population will be helpful to corroborate the findings of this study.

In summary, this study makes a significant contribution to media credibility research by increasing the understanding that the frequency of media exposure inadvertently increases audience awareness to the nature and characteristics of the media, which has an effect on their evaluations about the media. Also, this study has been able to provide evidence that audience perception about a medium is affected by their information preference on such medium which is informed by their preexisting beliefs and interests, showing that media content affects trust in the media. These results lend support to McLuhan’s “Medium is the Message” and Festinger’s selective exposure theories.

Declaration of Interest Statement

No potential conflict of interest was declared.

Ethics approval

This study was conducted with the approval of the Research Ethics Committee of the University of Ibadan, Nigeria. All the participants were notified that their participation in the study was voluntary and that information obtained will be kept with strict confidentiality. Thereafter, they were asked to sign a declaration of consent form.

Acknowledgements

This is to affirm that an earlier version of this paper was presented at the Fourth International Conference on Communication and Media Studies at University of Bonn, Germany, September 26-28, 2019. The authors wish to appreciate the reviewers at the conference for their constructive comments which were utilized in reworking the paper.

Additional information

Funding

The authors received no direct funding for this research.

Notes on contributors

Mistura Adebusola Salaudeen

Mistura Adebusola Salaudeen ([email protected]) is a doctoral candidate at the School of Communication, Hong Kong Baptist University, where she works as a Research/Teaching Assistant. She obtained her master’s degree in Communication and Language Arts from the University of Ibadan, Nigeria and her bachelor’s degree in Mass Communication from Adekunle Ajasin University, Nigeria. Her research interests include digital media studies, media credibility studies, journalism studies and communication issues focusing to Sino-African relations.

Ngozi Onyechi

Ngozi Onyechi ([email protected]) is currently a Lecturer at the Department of Communication and Language Arts, University of Ibadan, Nigeria. She has authored 10 research articles. Her research interests include: Development Media Studies, Social Media Studies and Media Studies.