• On the normative level (what society should do), the same guideline prevails once again: 47% of respondents believe that society in general should seek information primarily from neutral sources

• At the ideological extremes, there is a growing tendency to get news from media outlets that share one's own views, both on the left (26%) and on the right (21%)

This year’s study has reintroduced some questions from previous reports (2020) to gauge subject toward the news: a relationship guided by neutrality, by the confirmation of their own ideas, or by the contrast with differing viewpoints. The inclusion of this indicator adds a particularly useful perspective for interpreting Spaniards’ attitudes toward the news and also serves as a prelude to a second, equally relevant level of analysis: Spaniards’ perception of the Degree
media dependence on various political, economic, and social pressure groups.

The data that in Spain, a neutral approach continues to predominate—understood as the staff preference staff obtaining information from sources perceived as not aligned with a specific point of view (50%), compared to 15% who lean toward confirmation bias (seeking out sources that share their own point of view) and 18% who opt for contrast bias, based on turning to media that challenge their own ideas. On the normative level as well (what society should do), the same guideline prevails: 47% of respondents believe that society in general should base its information primarily on neutrality. The main trend, therefore, remains clear: the ideal of non-
news reporting is neither taking refuge in one’s own ideas nor contrasting them with other ways of perceiving a problem, but rather the aspiration toward a certain perceived impartiality.

 
However, a comparison with 2020 adds some nuance to that overall picture. The pursuit of neutrality remains virtually stable between 2020 and 2026 (48% versus 50%), but the confirmation of one’s own opinions drops sharply (from 30% to 15%), while the search for contrasting viewpoints gains ground (from 10% to 18%). In other words, neutrality remains internship , but the search for like-minded sources is losing relative importance, and the willingness to expose oneself to differing perspectives is growing. This does not necessarily mean that respondents routinely engage in such contrast,
but he does value it more than he did in 2020.

 
Even so, this preference for neutrality is influenced by ideology, being more common among those in the political center, while confirmation of one’s own viewpoint gains ground at the ideological extremes. Only 9% of respondents in the center say they prefer sources that share their viewpoint, while 56% opt for sources without a defined orientation. In contrast, at the ideological extremes, the desire for confirmation of one’s own ideas gains prominence—both on the left (26%) and on the right (21%)—while the preference for neutrality loses ground (45% and 34%, respectively). The ideal of perceived objectivity remains the majority view, but it is clearly weakening at the ideological fringes. This does not mean that neutrality disappears in those segments, but it does mean that it no longer occupies the nearly hegemonic position it retains among moderate sectors. In this sense, polarization does not replace the ideal of impartiality, but it erodes it where ideological identity becomes more intense.

The logic of contrast also adds a particularly important nuance. When the question is framed in normative terms, it is precisely those on the extremes who most strongly support the idea that others should expose themselves to sources that challenge their point of view: 38% on the far left and 36% on the far right, compared to 23% in the center. The data thus data a paradox: the most ideologically polarized groups tend to show a greater inclination toward confirmation bias in their personal preferences, but at the same time are the most supportive, in the abstract, of society opening itself up to contrasting viewpoints. Rather than a strict contradiction, this can be interpreted as the gap between consumption preferences and the normative ideals considered desirable for the public sphere.

Finally, an analysis by age group sample impartiality increases with age, while confirmation bias carries slightly more weight among younger people. Among those aged 18 to 24, for example, 18% prefer sources that share their point of view, slightly above the average . In contrast, among those over 65, the preference for neutrality rises to 56%.