@Ox going by the graph, The Wall Street Journal is the most trusted, not the economist.
No, they colour it if it is (see note) "percent who trust is significantly different from the percent who distrust". This means, in layman terms: it is pretty certain (probably more than 95%) that more people trust than distrust. This is the case for the Wall Street Journal in all 5 categories, but only in 4 for the Economist (we can't reasonably prove that more consistently conservative people trust it than distrust it)
However, the ranking is based on the absolute difference over all people. So the difference in the percentage that trust the Economist rather than distrust is higher than for the Wall Street Journal.
To illustrate, image the percentage differences would be something like this (as an example, the real numbers can probably be found somewhere)
Total Clib Mlib Mixd Mcon Ccon
The Economist 50% 68% 74% 60% 46% 02%
Wall Street Journal 40% 31% 45% 47% 41% 36%
While the total is lower for the Wall Street Journal, it is still proven to be more trusted than distrusted over all categories.
Now, Ox's statement is also wrong.
If you want to disagree with the most trusted news source, that's all fine with me. Go cite a Fox News article which is basically just as well trusted across the board.
(1) It is not proven that The Economist is the most trusted news source.
Then what is it:
(a) It was the news source with the biggest difference between trust and distrust. It could be 60% trusted and 10% distrusted, for a difference of 50%. But maybe BBC was 70% trusted and 25% distrusted. This would make BBC more trusted (but also more distrusted).
(b) In this sample! There is no proof that this difference is significantly larger than that of BBC. There is only proof that the difference is bigger than 0.
(2) Fox News is NOT basically just as well trusted across the board.
(a) Both for The Economist and Fox (and many others) it was proven that across the board more people trust them than distrust them. Again, it's about the difference between trust and distrust, not about trust itself.
(b) It is not clear and not shown whether the trust-distrust difference is significantly different between The Economist and Fox, but it may be! So while both are different from 0, one may still be much larger than the other.
(c) Even if the trust-distrust difference is not significantly different, then we simply cannot claim that there is a difference. The Economist may still have a higher trust-distrust difference, but we simply may not have been able to prove this with the study.
(d) In the sample, The Economist clearly has a better trust - distrust percentage, the difference in ranks is pretty large.
This is all statistics, please do not try to lightly interpret it and popularize it without understanding it, you would be no better than our politicians and journalist. If you want to prove a point, use the statistics correctly. But to do that, you may need to follow a class at university level.