Final Reflection

Final Reflection Writing

            The 2nd Blog I wrote was titled “Is the Republican Party anti-intellectual on social issues? “. With this title I was trying to make the point that to, many progressive thinkers, the mainstream republican presidential candidates at the time generally appear backwards on many important social and intellectual issues. My audience was the class and whoever else happened to read my blog, I didn’t respond to them on this particular blog considering, sadly, that I received zero comment responses.  My thesis statement was  “Pleasing the people and helping yourself become re-elected may at first sound similar, What at this point, it really comes down to is, will my policy in favor of the people get them to the polls, or am I better off with campaign funding to sway already active participants in the political process?”.  Looking back now it could’ve been much much better. My thesis should have been closer to the title, rather than that, considering that thesis is vague, and really unrelated to the paper somewhat, I guess I was hoping the blog title would ring more as the thesis than that statement. Although my thesis was not up to it’s potential, my ability to analyze seemed great. I provided many examples on a variety of republican presidential candidates who were backwards on particular, yet important, social issues.  I feel I worked well with other’s work, but I had a hard time getting their exact message across accurately, and not just completely stealing what they said. I think I found a better balance as the semester continued.

 

            My research paper was entitled “Media Bias”, which I think was an appropriate title, sure it wasn’t amazing, but intentionally so. I would rather have my readers focus on the bulk of my paper than have a flashy, but possibly misleading title, I meant to keep it simple and to the point. The thesis statement for my research paper was “The notion that media bias is prominently liberal is a myth, media bias goes both ways and is not always a bad thing, without bias, the news would not be nearly extensive as it is now, and would be unable to present stories from unique and personal angles.”  My audience was, again, my class. They brought up points like why does this matter? I responded with an example that Tucker Carlson used during at television debate where countries with traditionally intensely biased media has become almost ignored entirely by that countries populace.  I demonstrated my ability to analyze with my research that wasn’t particularly meant to support a thesis like mine, but it did.  I think at this point my ability to work with other’s work has come a long way, I was able to find a good balance between getting their points across, but not just writing what they said.

 

            My writing for the most part has stayed the same, but the major thing I did take away from this class was how to use sources more effectively. Near the beginning of the year I had a hard time creating my own arguments that were clearly defined differently from those my research had already attempted to argue for. For example during the first conference about the research presentation, I was having a really hard time coming up with my own argument, and not just rehashing the arguments of my possible sources. Yet the finished product in both my presentation and paper used a diverse array of sources to make a unique point. I think my writing is very articulate, but can be sometimes unorganized, as may be noticeable in this reflection.

Media Bias Research Paper

Media Bias

Cyborski R. Jacob

Northern Illinois University

On nearly a daily basis on news networks, media bias is a prominent topic. There is a long running rumor that media bias is strictly or primarily liberal. News casters on conservative networks often mention "the liberal media", which has created the misconception that liberal media bias far overshadows conservative bias. Also whenever a news media network mentions media bias, it is usually to call that bias unfair, which has created another misconception, The misconception that bias in media is always a bad thing. The notion that media bias is prominently liberal is a myth, media bias goes both ways and is not always a bad thing, without bias, the news would not be nearly extensive as it is now, and would be unable to present stories from unique and personal angles.

            Bias is everywhere, but why is it important? Tucker Carlson, on a television debate, noted the importance of avoiding certain types of media bias. During his debate, Carlson noted (2006) countries where the media has had a history of intense bias, and how the populations of those countries have become totally turned off to the media. Now, those people have a hard time obtaining reliable information concerning their government and a variety of other subjects that regularly appear on the news on a regular basis.  Do I think the American news media is so biased that people are ready to write off nearly all information they present? No, but Americans are surely aware of the bias, or the perception of bias concerning many news networks. According to a study by the Pew Research Center (2009), 37% of Americans see a great deal of bias, 67% see at least some bias, and the category “great deal of bias” received more percentage points than any other.  According to another study by the Pew Research Center (2009), 47% of polled Americans perceive Fox news as conservatively biased, whereas MSNBC is seen by 36% of Americans polled as having a strong liberal bias. Every station examined except Fox News (MSNBC, CNN, NBC, ABC, and CBS) all received scores on the liberally biased category of 30%+, and no station besides Fox News received any more than 14% as conservatively biased. So the notion of a liberally biased media is real, but does is it backed up scientifically?

First I want to start off with the notion that news media is prominent liberal. The problem with those who claim liberal bias in the media is that, there is no scientific evidence to support this claim. Sure they could find plenty of examples of media bias that may be liberal leaning, but those examples could easily be counteracted by an equal amount of examples of conservative bias. Measuring bias quantitatively is no easy task. There have been studies that attempt to quantitatively measure media bias, but these studies run into quite a few problems. Eric Alterman (2006), a columnist for The Nation Magazine and author of "What Liberal Media", said in a debate on media bias "On this issue of media bias, It's an incredibly rich topic for debate, because there's really no normative way to measure it in an academic environment.....You can't control the variable in media bias because time moves on and issues change.....I can say that President Clinton lied about getting a blowjob from an intern and President Bush lied about whether or not Iraq presented a threat to the US....those two lies are not equivalent. The point is you can't say the president was called a liar 18 times in one instance and 17 times in another instance and that proves bias, two issues are not comparable. Issues change, and it's therefore entirely an art rather than a science." What he is trying to say here, is that, media bias is extremely hard to quantitatively measure. The variability of news stories and their bias is too much to compare in a scientific setting.

Although this difficulty has been noted, it has not stopped studies from attempted to quantify media bias. A study was released in 2005 called "A Measure Of Media Bias" by Tim Groseclose. This study attempted to measure bias by assigning media outlets a score between zero and one hundred, zero being the most conservative, and 100 being the most liberal. Their scores changed based on how many times they cited anything that was also cited by a member of congress, then that news outlets score would change toward the side of the scale that is equal to that member of congress' political affiliation. This study produced expected results for the news stations that were polled, Fox News and The Washington Times scored conservatively biased whereas the New York Times scored liberally. Although most networks scored as expected, when this method was extended to think tanks outside the examined group, the flawed methods of this study became more and more obvious with the flawed results it began to produce. For example, Media Matters for America (2005) applied the same procedure as Groseclose’s study to other media outlets, The American Civil Liberties Union, a group that supports the legalization of abortion and gay rights, were scored as slightly conservative leaning. This study also fails to account for any measurement of the degree of bias. In measuring bias, surely the magnitude of the bias is nearly as important as the frequency at which it occurs. This is just one example of a study which tried to measure media bias, and failed, most likely due to what was mentioned earlier in this paper by Eric Altermann (2006), that there were too many variables.

After seeing this study, you might think that no studies can confirm liberally biased media, but surely they must all point toward it. This, again, is untrue. According to a recent study by the Pew Research Center (2012), President Obama did not receive one week of more positive than negative coverage. Of course they had to use a less than perfect method again for measuring positive and negative coverage (how the story was framed and what it was about) but this study does not point towards liberally biased media.  There are studies pointing towards bias in each direction, but each study released has a less than perfect method of measuring bias, because again, there are too many variables to stack up against each other in a scientific setting. There is no authoritative paper confirming bias to be prominently in one direction, the cry of bias being primarily or only from one side has become a cry of political ideologues defending their favorite party and refusing to admit they can do any wrong.

So without any scientific, quantitative studies confirming a prominent liberal bias in the American news media, why is the notion so popular? At times, conservatives can be guilty of widening the goalposts on what is considered liberally biased, and just moments later have a case of tunnel vision when it comes to bias on their own side. Jon Stewart (2012), host of a comedic but serious news program talked about how conservatives crying out about a war on religion were confusing not getting their way with an attack on their religion. I think the same thing happens to news casters, that they confuse non-conservative bias with liberal bias.

If you look back to February 29^th, 2012, when Rush Limbaugh (2012), conservative radio host, said on his show that a Georgetown University Law student was a slut for endorsing government funded contraception. He used a metaphor saying that if the taxpayers are paying for this law student to have sex, that she is in effect a slut. Very few people on the conservative side had called him out on this, including quite a few who had cried liberal bias on much softer topics. One of those conservatives is Lou Dobbs, who hosts a show on the Fox Business Network called Lou Dobbs Tonight. On his show, Dobbs (2012) had called the recently released movie, Dr. Seuss’ The Lorax, liberally biased against big industry. Another example is John Bolton, who appeared on another Fox News Network show, The Stossel Show. On his show, John Stossel (2012) was having a town hall meeting, which is where the public comes and asks questions. During this show, a veteran asked a strongly critical question to Bolton where after Bolton had answered, applause was edited in for the television broadcast. This is what I mean when I say conservatives at times are quick to call the left on any sort of possible bias, while slow to recognize their own. That is not to say that all conservatives are ignoring bias from their own side and only accusing liberals of bias, but rather to show an example of how low the standards may be for liberal bias, and how high they must be for conservative bias. This is in part what contributes to a public perception of a prominently liberally biased media.

            Although as you can see, bias in the media is rampant, it is not always a terrible thing. Whenever bias is talked about on the news, it is usually to call out one person or story for being unfair. This has given bias in the media a negative connotation and a very bad reputation within media. Regardless of these perceptions, bias is not always a bad thing. Bias can help reporters go more in depth about the stories they wish to present.  Tucker Carlson (2006) said in a television debate regarding himself as a reporter “The criterion is very simple, tell the truth, so I tell the truth as I see it, but very much from my own perspective so yes I am biased, my job however is very different than that from a straight reporter, whose job merely is to tell you what happened, their job, when a plane crashes is to tell you who was on the plane, when did it crash, etc etc… their job is to bring you the facts unpolluted by their preconceptions, their job is to tell you the news without trying to make a case for a particular position.”  What he means here is that straight reporters are the type that only gives confirmed facts, but he himself is the kind of reporter that includes his personal experience, and what he thinks about the topic from his point of view. This is the kind of bias that is good for the news media, as long as it is clear that whoever presents their viewpoint does not blur the line between fact and opinion.  In this debate, Carlson (2006) also talks about stealthy bias, which is where biased, opinionated reporting is presented as straight reporting. This is also a way to blur the line between opinion and fact, and this is where bias becomes harmful in the news media.  An example of beneficial bias is much more difficult to give, although I believe beneficial news bias is much more common.  David Poulson (2010) wrote on his website Great Lakes Echo “Well, would you say the crime reporter is biased if you overheard her remarking that murder is a poor way to settle a dispute? How will murderers ever get a fair shake in the media if we allow such people to report?” What he’s trying to say here is that, if a crime reporter had said murder is a poor way to settle a dispute, would you call that bias? It is indeed bias, because saying that murder is a poor way to settle a dispute is only the opinion of the reporter. Considering that most people would not disagree that murder is a poor way to settle a dispute, most would not see this type of reporting as bias. He goes on to write “Clean air and water and sustainable communities are worthy goals. I fail to see how acknowledging that is a compromise of journalistic ethics” What he means here is that, if a reporter had said that clean air and water are worthy goals for communities and that is why they support new energy sources, would you call them biased as well? They are using the exact same sort of bias as in the murder example. This is what I mean when bias can be a good thing, a reporter can give a more personal angle on a topic, as long as they make it clear that it is their opinion, preferably by stating that it is so, but it is also acceptable if obviously implied. This is where bias can help improve media. How would you expect a news story, for example, how wrong was George Bush for invading Iraq before confirming there were nuclear weapons? Without media bias and opinions from reporters, these types of stories would not exist. There is no way to quantify how right or wrong an action is, and therefore there is no quantitative way to report on such stories. Bias becomes necessary for a story such as this, and for all stories with any amount of subjectivity being reported on. Why not just leave subjective stories alone you might ask. These types of stories are extremely valuable to helping everyday Americans who are not experts in such fields develop their opinions. Most Americans do not have time to read in depth into the war on Iraq, and even further in depth into every small or large political move regarding it. Reporters publishing biased opinion pieces help Americans learn the reasoning of sides for and against political moves, and if they read a balanced amount of arguments from each side, they should be able to stack them up against each other and form their own opinion all while becoming more knowledgeable on what is going on politically in general.

            Media bias is everywhere, and it does matter. We do not want America to become a country where the media becomes so biased, it is ignored all together and the population subsequently has no source of reliable information on a plethora of topics, but we may very well be heading in that direction if it is not recognized that not all bias is bad, and that bias goes both directions. Studies on media bias generally fail or are insufficient, due to people and issues varying far too much over time to examine fairly in a scientific setting. No one side of the political spectrum is innocent of never using hidden bias or construing the line between fact and opinion. It happens in media, and as long as there is human error, it may very well be inevitable. Media bias can be a great tool in helping reporters give more extensive and sufficient reports on subjects that may be more subjective in nature.  The key is to recognize when reporters are using dishonest tactics to hide facts and present their own opinions, and to be honestly pursuing the truth instead of looking for stories or facts that may support your political ideology to get the most out of the news media.

References

 (2012, April 9). Lou Dobbs Tonight [Television broadcast]. New York City: Fox News.

             Date unknown, although fairly recent due to him talking about The Lorax the movie which came out fairly recently, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wYLmgQy6zq8

 (2012). - [Television series episode]. In Stossel Show. New York City: Fox News.

Edited, aired version: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4JDX0-Uo1E&context=C4fe2c35ADvjVQa1PpcFM3Lz0PRT9dMCfnwrlWWUBumHHNTrbSxtE=

                        Unedited Version Available Online:

             http://www.foxbusiness.com/on-air/stossel/blog/2012/02/27/unedited-students-liberty-video-0

Groseclose, T., & Milyo, J. (2005). A Measure of Media Bias. The Quaterly Journal of Economics, CXX(4), 1191-1237.

 Matters; Philidelphia Weekly. (2005, December 21). Former fellows at conservative think tanks issued flawed UCLA-led study on media's "liberal bias" | Media Matters for America. Media Matters for America. Retrieved April 1, 2012, from http://mediamatters.org/research/200512220003

Poulson, D. (2010, March 6). Reporting with bias | Great Lakes Echo. Great Lakes Echo - Environmental news across the basin. Retrieved April 1, 2012, from http://greatlakesecho.org/2010/03/06/reporting-with-a-bias-for-a-clean-environment/

 (2012). The Vagina Idealogues [Television series episode]. In The Daily Show With Jon Stewart. New York City: Comedy Central.