The Modern News Media Reporting, A Failure Exposed
80
New by Tobey
Ads by Google
Find bonds by issuer, maturity & credit, RBC Wealth Management
Cashing in on Your Dental Gold? Compare Gold Buyers for Top Price.
Fully Functional, Space Saving Beds Order Online. Get In-Home Delivery!
What Represents Media Bias
Media bias presents itself in many forms. Some overt, others covertly and intentionally. A news report presenting only one perspective of an issue known by the general public to have more than one, without acknowledging the fact, is guilty of bias. If on any given issue one party says 'black' and the other party says 'white', a reporting of the issue must include both perspectives in order to be considered a 'report'. Anything less becomes commentary and therefore, bias.
Likewise, ignoring facts that do not necessarily reflect the general views of the publisher/owner is also a form of bias. Reporting does not involve picking and choosing which facts to report. We should not confuse specific details with facts. The news report that Monica Lewinski's dress was blue is a detail. The stain on the dress was a fact. The elimination of any fact from a story in order to greater support any particular viewpoint is bias. Another form of this type of bias in news reporting is a deliberate selection of which stories to highlight and which to downplay. Downplaying seems to be the chosen form of bias in the modern news media. Occurances such as reports regarding the various 'Tea Parties' is a good example of this type of news bias. Various outlets reported hundreds of thousands of participants nationwide while others used 'downplaying' terms like 'a few thousand' or 'several thousand'. A careful reader could determine the political slant of the puplication based on its reporting of this event alone.
Modern news media display their bias many times, not in words or lack thereof, but in their placement of the report. A story placed on the front page or in the first five minutes of a news broadcast tends to carry more weight than a story buried within the publication or broadcast after the final weather report. Everyone is aware of the practice by your local newspaper, a printed error on page one is usually corrected in the next edition on page thirteen.
The use of un-named sources often reflects media bias. Reporting terms such as 'experts believe', 'observers commented', 'the American people want', are all general terms, frequently used in biased reporting. Experts believe usually equates to 'I' believe. The expedient use of experts should also be scrutinized closely. Compare quotes attributed to 'experts' to the use of expert testimony in a criminal proceeding. A defense attorney is only going to employ expert testimony from the expert supporting his case. The same is true with the prosecutor. You get what you pay for. News sources partake from the same tree.
Bias in reporting is displayed through the use of identifiers. Identifiers are used to soften or harden what might otherwise be a critical description of a group or event. 'Right-wing Extremist' as opposed to 'Progressive' establishes a definite image in the mind of the reader, whether an accurate description or not. One group may be described as 'conservative' or 'christian' while their counterpart is labeled a 'womens group' or 'civil rights' group. The subtle use of descriptors often and usually points to bias on the part of the publisher or producer of the report.
So, what's acceptible?
What is not bias? How can we determine a legitimate news report from any other? Many of us criticize articles or broadcasts as being excessively biased when in fact, they're not. Editorials by definition cannot be biased. They are a statement of an individual or group belief regarding any given situation, event or policy. Additionally, any statement offered specifically as an opinion cannot be considered biased.
Any news report that may reflect badly on our particular party, no matter the source, if accurate, is not bias. It becomes a statement of fact no matter how damaging. News agencies reporting the peccadilloes of John Edwards, whether right or left slanted, were not biased. Only when one side or the other began to report 'selectively', to highlight and downplay did media bias enter the picture.
Bias, on both sides, has killed the news industry. Through their own agenda driven extremes they've corrupted the process and created distrust. We expect and deserve an accurate unbiased representation of events. Until providers of 'The News' live up to the trust we once placed in them, they will continue to be marginalized.
digital Cameras under $100
 | Amazon Price: $79.95 List Price: $89.99 |
Todays news media, print and electronic, is hemorrhaging from self-inflicted wounds. Newspapers, news magazines and media outlets are losing subscribers, advertisers, suffering from ever shrinking budgets and being forced to conduct massive layoffs. The foundation of their demise can be laid upon their bias, a basic lack of professional journalism. Rasmussen reports that 51% of those polled nationwide believe the news media to be bias. 34% believe the media to be somewhat bias. There are a plethora of reasons given for the bias exposed in modern news puplications all of which are invalid excuses to be kind. It's hard work to produce a fair and balanced story and the 'he who hesitates is lost' rush to produce any story ill serves the reader. All writers, journalist and otherwise must deal with deadlines. Mere laziness or ineptness on the part of the reporter plays a part as well. The very term 'reporter' implies the act of reporting. Not commenting. Reporting is an accurate portrayal of the facts. A reporter is bound by his occupational description to present both sides or any event as honestly as possible. Such has not been the case for many years and in recent times has failed miserably.
No comments:
Post a Comment