The Wall Street Journal has a reputation for leaning to the right. However, this morning I was struck by the sentiments of WSJ readers and just how sharply they contrasted with those of the country as a whole.

In the Wall Street Journal’s online poll asking readers to grade President Obama’s State of the Union, the plurality of people—40%—gave the President an “F,” just under the combined percentage of people who gave the President an “A,” “B,” or “C” grade. A whopping 57.6% gave the President a “D” or an “F.”

Looking at a scientific CNN Opinion Research poll, however, paints a very different picture. 84% of of respondents felt that the State of the Union was either “very positive” or “somewhat positive,” and only 4% thought that the speech was “very negative.”

Of course, there are inherent biases in people who choose to respond to online surveys. However, the fact that the disparities between the WSJ and CNN polls are so significant is telling. It appears to be illustrative of a broader phenomenon, no doubt fueled by the internet, in which news sources are politicized and people seek out partisan reporting that affirms existing opinions. This spurs news organizations to produce information that placates their audiences, resulting in the formation of echo-chambers in which partisan rhetoric masqueraded as news reaches readers/viewers/listeners who accept opinion as truth and relay it to others as such. What our democracy requires in order to ensure a well-informed electorate, however, is precisely the opposite.