Probably Biased: Why Won’t the Media Admit it?
Amid all the fuss during this election, I wonder if anybody else has grown tired of the finger pointing regarding media biases. And if the finger pointing in itself wasn’t enough, we have to endure tiresomely clichéd slogans (i.e. “CNN: No Bias No Bull” or “FOX: Fair and Balanced”) that claim objectivity and are repeated with propaganda-like zeal. I think this matter could be solved entirely if we just rid ourselves of ‘objective news’ and made networks admit to their biases—partisan news would be more honest and would truly allow for ideas to compete.
Before examining biases, I first need propose a few ideas concerning objectivity. Firstly, to be objective means the ability for one to separate oneself from sentiments in order to examine something both calmly and rationally. Secondly, the objective world is the world in which truth lies and concrete events occur in their entirety. Here is where the problem occurs: We are emotional creatures, blinded by our sentiments and unable to separate ourselves from our beliefs/biases. Ergo, we as humans are unable to completely access the objective world in its entirety. Our biases, obtained (a posteriori) through life experiences, determine how we interpret the objective world. In addition, since our biases interpret the objective world, it is indeed possible for our biases to strengthen or weaken themselves in accordance to what we hear. Here’s an example:
As a concrete event, let’s say we have a horrific two-car accident that leaves both cars fused together and drivers with life-threatening injuries. After hearing this fact and filtering it through their biases, here is how a few parties may react via first impressions. The physics student may first question the force of the impact so that the energy transferred was able to fuse the two cars together. The Christian, such as myself, would wonder if they are saved. Meanwhile, a third person yearns for universal healthcare. In this example, we witness a concrete objective event interpreted through biases and the resulting product, i.e., first impressions. (Note: Although I merely address first impressions, this would inevitably affect the ‘spin’ of the event covered. It should follow that this “bias filter” would show when hearing about the event in the news.)
If what I proposed holds true, the idea of objectivity in reporting is quite absurd. Why should reporters be held to a different standard than normal people? Are they too ministers of truth? Relating this idea to other forms of news media, the idea of objective reporting is as absurd as thinking that the presentation of two sides of an argument will ultimately yield objectivity. If you want to see this point for yourself, try watching FOX’s Hannity and Colmes—a show that is dedicated to both strong conservative and liberal viewpoints only yields arguing!
As was earlier stated, it would be much easier if media outlets would just admit their biases. Think about it. Instead of wasting untold amounts of time debating on who is being fair, we could just cut to the chase and hear the news. Why not skip the guesswork and listen to the news that agrees with your viewpoint? In addition, if the outlets were honest, then the news environment would finally resemble a free market as opposed to bitter ideological enemies pretending to get along.
I ask you (and be honest with yourself), why are you reading The Phoenix? Aren’t you aware that we are biased? Maybe this is where the idea works: We don’t lie about our views and you read it all the same. Would this concept not work for a liberal/progressive publication? Instead of forcing “objective equality” by providing the token conservative, liberal, and moderate viewpoints, we simply provide one. Why not have partisan news networks that autonomously function? The idea of partisan news networks truly allows for competing viewpoints and ultimately, lets the consumer choose what they want to hear. While you run the risk of people vehemently getting stuck in their ways, at least they’d be honest about where they stand.
Related posts:
