Media bias

May 17, 2010 • Anna Qian  
Filed under Opinion

You’ve got your left-wing extremists and your crazy conservatives. And somewhere in the middle are your actual news people. The problem is that most Americans trust biased news services that often omit important stories. Or rather, they’ll spin these stories in such a way as to convolute them completely. Take media coverage on presidential candidates for example. When not closely following their progress through high-tech graphics devices, the news programs take great care to delve into the personal lives of such candidates. Alright, the media is biased, so what? The matter lies in the knowledge that average Americans need to make educated decisions and stay located within the global scope.

Not all citizens vote, and does it really even matter? Your local government textbook will tell you that only about 15% of Americans know the names of their congressional representatives (ours is Harry Mitchell if you’re in Arizona District 5). Surely we’re not supposed to find this information ourselves? No, that’s what the news networks are for. Their purpose is to inform and publicize important issues, such as the controversial immigration bill. Unfortunately, after much debate and airtime, audiences still don’t know much about this law. The uproar didn’t really begin until after the bill had already been passed. Where was the media, the investigative journalism that ought to have covered this important issue? Most probably they were covering some other run-down story, or even local news. Day after day, your local news channel reruns the same old reel, with some new car crash or 10 easy recipes to a slimmer waistline. News is not meant to be entertainment but rather exposition. Audiences need to know what’s going on around the world, good and bad.

Mixed in with this selective representation of current events are political bias and personal values. While most everyone knows that terrorism is bad, not many know why it occurs. Where is the other side of the story? Favored news channels such as FOX or MSNBC focus on issues that matter to them, and that increase ratings. In doing so, they move away from objective news to biased entertainment. Trust in newscasters is high, yet is this trust well-founded? Does your preferred channel get their facts straight or do they speculate and infer? Almost every story is seasoned with a good guy bad guy dichotomy. Name calling, sound bites, and unflattering pictures help to move their position along. By only seeing one point of view (namely that of the station), audiences cannot possibly form their own opinions. Instead, they must simply believe what the telly tells them.

Even in the most recent presidential election, the news abounded with irrelevant data. While viewers will most definitely remember McCain as a maverick veteran and Obama as a hopeful African American, not many knew the actual stances these candidates have on important issues today such as the economy or healthcare. Why is it that, so often, important issues are only exposed after the fact, such as in the case of disasters or controversial immigration laws? Does not the media, as our primary source of information, have a duty to tell us what is going on? Are important topics so difficult to find that we need a minute by minute breakdown of hackneyed events? And where, if not the news, are we supposed to find legitimate info?

 Email This Post        Print This Post