You're on to something here. The press has a bias toward "official" sources
in general, both government and corporate. A huge part of a newspaper's
non-advertising column inches are taken up either by press releases
generated in PR departments, or by direct quotes from press conferences.
Here's a couple of relevant quotes on the nonsensical nature of the "both
sides" model of objectivity:
"The norms of 'objective reporting' thus involve presenting 'both sides' of
an issue with very little in the way of independent forms of verification...
[A] journalist who systematically attempts to verify facts--to say which
set of facts is more accurate--runs the risk of being acused of abandoning
their objectivity by favoring one side over another....
"....[J]ournalists who try to be faithful to an objective model of
reporting are simultaneously distancing themselves from the notion of
independently verifiable truth....
"The 'two sides' model of journalistic objectivity makes news reporting
a great deal easier since it requires no recourse to a factual realm. There
are no facts to check, no archives of unspoken information to sort
through.... If Tweedledum fails to challenge a point made by Tweedledee,
the point remains unchallenged."
From Justin Lewis, "Objectivity and the Limits of Press Freedom" Project
Censored Yearbook 2000. pp. 173-74
"...I find myself increasingly covering Washington's most ignored beat: the
written word. The culture of deceit is primarily an oral one. The
soundbite, the spin, and the political product placement depend on no one
spending too much time on the matter under consideration.
"Over and over again, however, I find that the real story still lies
barely hidden and may be reached by nothing more complicated than turning
the page, checking the small type in the appendix, charging into the
typographical jungle beyond the executive summary, doing a Web search, and,
for the bravest, actually looking at the figures on the charts."
From Sam Smith. Project Censored Yearbook 2000. p. 60
I also recall a quote from David Halberstam in which he said that
objectivity, as professional journalists understood it, was adopting a pose
of naivete and gullibility toward official pronouncements. What he meant, I
think, is similar to Lewis' point.
From: rex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: rex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: A "deep" look at media bias
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 11:06:07 -0500
or another spin on that topic is that whether it is supposed left- (or
right) wing media bias, I have never seen an article that addresses the
more fundamental issue that most media space is devoted to "statism" (as
compared with your word "politics") where almost every "news" item is "the
government did THIS today..." or the government passed THAT law today" or
the government sued that business today." Indeed sometimes, no matter what
the issue, someone from the government is asked for a comment, as if the
news item was "The government had this to say about that...."! Sometimes I
pick up the newspaper and almost every article is simply telling the reader
what the government (e.g. politicians) said or did about various issues.
(even sports?!?!?) The government did this about a tax for another
stadium...; The government said this about big sports salaries; It is
very depressing. I've devoted a couple of webpages to the problem
http://members.ij.net/rex/media.html
http://members.ij.net/rex/mediapoint.html
I also think that the problem you describe is proof that government schools
violate the first amendment free of press and speech because government
schools not only destroy the market in education, government schools create
statists, and the news media are examples.
http://members.ij.net/rex/schoolsmedia.html
----- Original Message -----
From: Aschwin de Wolf
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2003 9:27 AM
Subject: A "deep" look at media bias
Hello list,
Much has been written about left- (or right) wing media bias but I have
never seen an article that addresses the more fundamental issue whether the
amount of space papers (or the tv networks) devote to politics as such
reflects the average reader's interest in politics. Why do we not see more
(frontpage) news about health, personal finance, science etc?
_________________________________________________________________
Need a shot of Hank Williams or Patsy Cline? The classic country stars are
always singing on MSN Radio Plus. Try one month free!
http://join.msn.com/?page=offers/premiumradio
