Bias in the media... help!

Forums: Reference
Email this Topic • Print this Page

I'm not sure if this topic belongs here, but I guess it's worth a shot.
I'm a first year journalism major and I have to write a paper on a recent example of bias in the media. It seemed so simple when it was assigned, but now that I am actually searching, I'm stuck and nothing is catching my attention.
I just need some guidance on what topics/subject matter I should take particular interest in and just to be pointed in the right direction.

Thanks a lot!

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 1,485 • Replies: 19

No top replies

welcome to A2k.

have you tried wikipedia ?

0 Replies

Go down to your local newsstand or just register for seven or eight newspapers. Find the same story in each: for example - today's lead story for most was Putin's speech in Munich and John McCain's rebuttal.

Print the stories out and compare the presentation of the facts (Putin made a speech. What are the details of the speech reported and how are they written out? McCain rebuts. How? What did he say? What are the bones of the story?)

Now, look at the rest of the story. What is added onto the facts to dress out the story. What flavors are sprinkled on? If PaperA leaves out some parts but adds others, is that editorialism or sloppy use of the facts?

There's more but that should get you started.

Joe(anyone who thinks there are only two sides to every story hasn't ever been in a newsroom)Nation

0 Replies

A very good topic right now is the media's coverage of Iran weapons in Iraq. The US government is blaming the Iran government of providing those weapons, but according to a tv reporter, not one case of weapons transfer was found by Iranians. Let us know what you find, and Good luck.

0 Replies

Oh, I forgot one thing that should be easy to see: if six papers cover the story and three use it for a lede and one shoves it under the fold and the other two stuff it, is that bias?

Joe(hmmm. Inquring minds want to know)Nation

0 Replies

I like Joe Nations suggestion on getting papers (quite a few) and compare
them. They are usually all the same. Good luck.

0 Replies

Most newspapers use the same original source for stories, so getting six newspapers will be a great waste of time and money. It's better to go on the net and get news from foriegn sources like the BBC and Arab news.

0 Replies

Here's a case of bias...or just twisted, messy media reporting.

It was highly touted earlier in the week that Eddie Murphy, nominated for an Oscar for best supporting actor, "stormed out of the theatre" after his loss to Alan Arkin. He didn't stick around to support fellow cast mates who were nominated or performing later on during the show. He just jumped up and split. Right?

Dig a little deeper and you read that he did the same thing at the Golden Globes, left the show right after his category was announced. The only difference was, he actually won the Golden Globe.

His publicist said that he leaves these shows early to be with his kids. Rolling Eyes

whatever...

The point is, why would the media create such messiness? Making something out of nothing?

I know this doesn't represent bias exactly but it does show that there's not much integrity left in journalism these days.

0 Replies

Look for the emotical (is that a word) words in a story and remove or replace them with more or less intense words.

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

Most newspapers use the same original source for stories, so getting six newspapers will be a great waste of time and money. It's better to go on the net and get news from foriegn sources like the BBC and Arab news.

I disagree. I've used the 6 paper method for some time and you'd be amazed at the differences in the stories. In most cases you'll find that less than 10% of articles match up between the papers. If they are all using the same source then where is the other 90% of what they are printing coming from?

(You can get most major newspapers on-line for free as well)

0 Replies

fishin, About two-three decades ago when newspapers started to lose their customers and money, they cut back on foreign and "outside" correspondents on the scene. What's common today are freelance correspondents and photographers, something that didn't exist back in the good old days.

Many of the major news items in our local newspapers, especially about the wars and/or international news, comes from the New York Times and/or Washington Post. However, the San Jose Mercury News have done a yeoman's job of investigative reporting, and have won many awards for "originality" and reporting original stories. The San Jose Mercry News was recently sold, because it's getting harder to make money while its circulation continues to decline.

During my travels, I read other newspapers, but they are usually news common in other major newspapers across the country. Even between the San Francisco Chronicle and San Jose Mercury News, the headlines mirror each other quite often.

Can you provde us with some examples of what you are claiming about the difference in six newspapers? I'm curious, because my perceptions may be mistaken.

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

Can you provde us with some examples of what you are claiming about the difference in six newspapers? I'm curious, because my perceptions may be mistaken.

There has been a fair amount of discussion in recent weeks about a story on Bush's Jan 11th visit to Ft. Benning, GA that is a good example.

The AP story as carried by ABC News:

Quote:

"Bush Cheered at Fort Benningcheering soldiers in camouflage..."

http://www.abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=2788642

The NY Times story under their byline on the same visit:

Quote:

"Bush Speaks and Base Is Subdued received a restrained response from soldiers who clapped politely but showed little of the wild enthusiasm that they ordinarily shower on the commander in chief."

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/12/us/12prexy.html?ex=1172984400&en=5fc88180ba544c19&ei=5070

The same visit as reposrted in the Denver post by a different AP reporter:

Quote:

"Plan earns cheers, rebukes
Troops applaud president in Georgia; Congress stings Rice, Gates
By Tom Raum
The Associated Press
Article Last Updated: 01/11/2007 11:57:44 PM MST

Washington - It was a tale of two audiences.

The day after President Bush unveiled his plan to send 21,500 more U.S. troops to Iraq, the president was robustly applauded and cheered. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Defense Secretary Robert Gates got pounded.

Bush went to Fort Benning, Ga., and was surrounded with soldiers in camouflage shouting "hooah, hooah." Rice and Gates went to Capitol Hill to defend Bush's decision - and encountered stinging criticism from Democrats and Republicans alike."

http://www.denverpost.com/search/ci_4997103

Again, the same visit is reported in the Boston Globe under their own byline:

Quote:

"Gates calls for buildup in troops
By Bryan Bender, Globe Staff | January 12, 2007

...The plan was also well received among the troops at Fort Benning, Ga., where Bush spoke after the White House meeting yesterday. Soldiers applauded when the president told them he believes "it's important to increase the end strength of the United States Army so it can remain engaged.""

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2007/01/12/gates_calls_for_buildup_in_troops/

CNN and the Washington Post also ran stories (under their own bylines) that downplayed the audience response - storeis very similar to the NY Times story.

So which was it? "cheers"? "polite applause"? "robust applause"? "subdued"? "well received"?

About the only thing the stories agree on is that Bush gave a speech at Ft. Benning.

0 Replies

Here's my take on Bush's speech at Ft Benning. The soldiers applauded enthusiastically at some of the things that Bush said, and not so much on other parts of his speech.

The newspapers bias their reports to sell newspaper. Why can't both be the "truth?"

0 Replies

Fishin, you just did the kid's homework for him.

Joe(except for the deciding if it was bias part)Nation

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

The newspapers bias their reports to sell newspaper. Why can't both be the "truth?"

I think the idea that papers are biased is the main point here. The question is how does a person figure out what and how is it biased and what isn't? If person "A" only read the NY Times story and person "B" only read the Denver Post version they'd be likely to come away with very different views of how the event went. That is why looking at several different papers helps to filter the biases out.

0 Replies

Another thought about bias especially about "this" topic. When any president speaks to the troops, most will always applaud, because the president is the commander in chief. I'd dare say, soldiers will always applaud when any president speaks to the troops.

0 Replies

Joe Nation wrote:

Fishin, you just did the kid's homework for him.

Joe(except for the deciding if it was bias part)Nation

yeah.

Hopefully his paper was turned in last week. Otherwise I made it to easy for him.

0 Replies

Joe Nation wrote:

Fishin, you just did the kid's homework for him.

Joe(except for the deciding if it was bias part)Nation

That was a good one. Laughing

0 Replies

fishin', You are right, and yours meets the topic's inquiry; bias in the news.

0 Replies

Just watch FOX NEWS for a few days. Laughing

Compare the Scooter Libby and Sandy Berger reporting. Rolling Eyes

0 Replies

Bias in the media... help!

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know