HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
Jan. 25, 2007 One of the networks recently broadcast a quip from a smug media member which was striking in its interpretation of reality. This gentleman (I do not recall who made the comment and it's not that important as I'm sure the general flavor of the statement is shared by many others) observed that it was interesting how so many conservatives, who claim a liberal media bias exists, look at the daily news on television or in their local rags and believe they are seeing biased coverage, "...as if the truth is biased to the left." He then turned to another member of the panel and the two of them chuckled in a self-congratulatory manner as if they had just personally pulled the curtain back on the Wizard of Oz for all to see. On the surface it would seem the network cohorts had ample reason to be celebrating; the comment appears to have hit the nail right on its head. If the media is merely relaying the truth to the masses, covering events as they actually take place, how can this be interpreted as being biased in any way? Reality, though, has many sides and angles which serve to make up the whole structure. Whether or not we see those various perspectives depends upon our own agenda, background and experiences. If we ask a structural engineer and a street corner artist to describe a particular building in their own words there is little doubt that we are going to get two very different responses. Likewise, there is a good chance we would get varying answers from an 18 year old versus an 80 year old, even if they both have similar backgrounds. This certainly does not mean, in either case, that one of our respondents is lying or is somehow misrepresenting what they see. It is more likely that they are just seeing two different things. None of us really sees the complete truth; we just see our version of it, the portion we are predisposed to see---likely that which we want to see. One of the more clear examples of how media presents a biased perspective of reality, even while it is essentially telling the truth, is in sports coverage of local teams. After a big game, take a few moments to see how the media in each market handles the coverage of what transpired on the field. In this age, it can be done easily before you finish your morning cereal and coffee. Invariably, the coverage in the winner's city is full of endless accolades for the local team, how they stuck together, persevered through all sorts of troubles, etc., to come out on top in the end. Even coverage of the game itself is concentrated on everything the home team did right to pull it out, how the game plan was perfect and could not be successfully countered. Seemingly endless analysis, depending upon how big a game it was, will concentrate on the greatness and invincibility of the good guys. (This is often the mindset presented even after a closely contested game.) Conversely, a check of the losing city's newspaper coverage often shows a distinctly different viewpoint. Columnists and writers concentrate on what is wrong with the home team, where they messed up and how things could have been different if only this happened or that happened. Sure, some credit might be thrown towards the winners, but it is usually couched in the "if only" mentality. In each city, very little attention is generally given to the opposing team. It is almost as if another team was not even present on the field. Local coverage of winners tells us everything they did right while we're told everything the losers did wrong from its own media, or even how they were cheated out of victory in one way or another. The disparity in how the game is presented between media members in two cities can often be so different that the reader is left to wonder if the various reporters watched the same game. Yet, it is patently incorrect to state that the reporters on either side are lying about anything. Generally, in fact, they are all telling the truth; it might not be the complete truth, but it is a version of the truth. After a big home run in a baseball game, we read about how the hometown hero crushed the ball in clutch fashion, while hundreds or thousands of miles away the losing team coverage explains how the pitcher made a "mistake" with his pitch location which resulted in the home run. In this case, we have two different pictures of the same event being painted by "objective" reporters. Both sides are telling the truth as they see it, yet one cannot reasonably dispute the fact that a somewhat tainted picture is being provided to each home market. Perhaps it's too strong to call it a lie, but clearly each side is getting a skewed version of "the truth". So the question remains, if we can indeed receive a biased version of something as simple and straightforward as a baseball or football game from media who are technically telling us the truth, why is it so absurd to believe that a similarly subjective perspective could not be presented in other matters, many of which are so complex and convoluted that it can be extremely difficult to obtain a complete version of the truth? The events which transpire in a baseball game are relatively clear and concrete, and yet the complete truth cannot seemingly be relayed by many reporters covering these events. Should we then reasonably expect news reporters to garner the whole truth on something as complex and involved as the national economy, the Iraq War or other issues? Further, in the same way that sports reporters within a given city, over time, begin to take a similar approach and tone in their coverage of the local teams' exploits, it is not so outlandish that other news reporters who are generally more sympathetic to liberal causes than conservative ones, would adopt similarities in how they present "the truth". In fact, these reporters may believe completely that they have acquired and presented the whole truth when they have not even come close. And the dissemination of a partial truth can be as misleading and damaging as a deliberate lie. ------------ About the author: Ed Abraham is a concerned citizen living in flyover country, U.S.A., who happens to be truly disgusted by the loss of common sense in our society and is doing all he can to try to reinstall it. Email: eabra@myway.com Comment on this article here! ------------ All articles are EXCLUSIVE to Useless-Knowledge.com. Please link to this article rather than copying and pasting it onto your site (which would be unauthorized and illegal). |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
