"There is no such thing as an objective point of view"
This is a statement relayed via The Bay Area Is Talking in regards to media bias and I couldn't agree more.
What there certainly is though is an objective way of reporting the news and that is to be free of a "point of view" or to at least represent a "neutral point of view." Unfortunately what most of the media have fallen victim to is the need to spice up the news by presenting it from a particular viewpoint in order to add "depth" or "human interest" to the story. The "mainstream media" has fallen victim to the concept of news as entertainment, rather than news as information.
Let's look at the "headline" on MSNBC.com for today, Sept. 6th, 2005: [The image might change throughout the day but I hope it won't]
Notice the headline "It's Going To Be Awful", superimposed over flooding and fire. Granted, Mayor Nagin's statements are important, however, taking some of the darkest statements and using those as your "lead in" implies a leaning towards the famous "if it bleeds, it leads" mentality of the media. There are very few stories presenting the "good" that local, state and federal agencies are doing, but plenty of stories on the "bad."
Why is the media biased, or at least, why is there a perception of media bias? Could it be that the "point of view" of the media is slanted towards a particular viewpoint? Studies have pointed to various political affiliations / beliefs that seem prevelant in the media, but does this affect their reporting? It depends on your point of view.
I will be posting more about this later today.
What there certainly is though is an objective way of reporting the news and that is to be free of a "point of view" or to at least represent a "neutral point of view." Unfortunately what most of the media have fallen victim to is the need to spice up the news by presenting it from a particular viewpoint in order to add "depth" or "human interest" to the story. The "mainstream media" has fallen victim to the concept of news as entertainment, rather than news as information.
Let's look at the "headline" on MSNBC.com for today, Sept. 6th, 2005: [The image might change throughout the day but I hope it won't]
Notice the headline "It's Going To Be Awful", superimposed over flooding and fire. Granted, Mayor Nagin's statements are important, however, taking some of the darkest statements and using those as your "lead in" implies a leaning towards the famous "if it bleeds, it leads" mentality of the media. There are very few stories presenting the "good" that local, state and federal agencies are doing, but plenty of stories on the "bad."
Why is the media biased, or at least, why is there a perception of media bias? Could it be that the "point of view" of the media is slanted towards a particular viewpoint? Studies have pointed to various political affiliations / beliefs that seem prevelant in the media, but does this affect their reporting? It depends on your point of view.
I will be posting more about this later today.
