Lynda/WA
04-20-2001, 05:55 PM
Just how biased do you feel the media is and what type of media do you feel is the least biased? And how much of an impact do you feel this bias has on what we believe?
I think radio is the least biased, then newspapers then TV. My reasoning is that I hear of things on the radio that never make it to the paper or tv. I also feel the media is very biased in general based on the *spin* they put on things. Considering that some of the media biases (and subsequent public persceptions) are completely opposite to reality I think the media has an immense impact on our beliefs.
For example - TV leads us to believe that millionaires inherit their money. In reality over 80% completely became wealthy on their own and are first generation rich. That's similar to the 84% nouveau rich in 1892. America is as much a land of oppurtunity as 100 years ago but TV (especially) makes out that that the rich are becoming richer and the poor poorer.
Another example - much ado was made about how much money George W Bush and Dick Cheney earned. It made it to all three types of media. Only on radio did I hear that Bush declined payment as Gov while he campaigned (about 40,000$) but Gore/ Clinton didn't. Only on radio did I hear that of Cheney's 36 mil income he paid 14 mil in taxes and gave nearly 8 mil to charities (mainly to universities and for medical research). Besides Bush declining 40,000 of his salary he paid 240,000 in taxes and donated 143,000$ to charities (ie Boy & girl scouts) out of his 894,000 income. I do remember Gore's donation of 357$ (that's right no zeros!) made it to all three media types a few years ago but only in passing.
Today I heard that the World Health Organization came out with a report stating that second hand smoke is much less of a health hazard then previously claimed. (My impression is that they are saying it's negligable) I've only heard of that report on radio. When it was said that second hand smoke was a big problem it made all media forms.
Another example - anytime a gun makes it to school it makes national news. Recently there was a hand grenade brought to school locally, another student was terrorized with pipe bombs by another student (in fact his father lost a leg) and a number of other bomb incidents have made local news only. I haven't heard of any of them making national news (except for the threat sent via internet to NY from Portland). That leads me to believe they are happening across the country in much larger numbers but never getting national media attention unless multilple people actually die (ie Oklahoma vs local mad losing leg).
I could go straight down the line and on most *hot* topics the media concentrates on one side of the issue - reporting everything from the *politically correct* standpoint yet barely mentioning evidence to the contrary. Or they spin it. For example when the anti-abortion website case was appealed in favor of the anti-abortion people the newspaper headline read *Court protects abortion website*. You had to actually read the article to see it was an anti-abortion website.
So - Just how biased do you feel the media is and what type of media do you feel is the least biased? And how much of an impact do you feel this bias has on what we believe? And what are some example of media bias you feel exist?
I think radio is the least biased, then newspapers then TV. My reasoning is that I hear of things on the radio that never make it to the paper or tv. I also feel the media is very biased in general based on the *spin* they put on things. Considering that some of the media biases (and subsequent public persceptions) are completely opposite to reality I think the media has an immense impact on our beliefs.
For example - TV leads us to believe that millionaires inherit their money. In reality over 80% completely became wealthy on their own and are first generation rich. That's similar to the 84% nouveau rich in 1892. America is as much a land of oppurtunity as 100 years ago but TV (especially) makes out that that the rich are becoming richer and the poor poorer.
Another example - much ado was made about how much money George W Bush and Dick Cheney earned. It made it to all three types of media. Only on radio did I hear that Bush declined payment as Gov while he campaigned (about 40,000$) but Gore/ Clinton didn't. Only on radio did I hear that of Cheney's 36 mil income he paid 14 mil in taxes and gave nearly 8 mil to charities (mainly to universities and for medical research). Besides Bush declining 40,000 of his salary he paid 240,000 in taxes and donated 143,000$ to charities (ie Boy & girl scouts) out of his 894,000 income. I do remember Gore's donation of 357$ (that's right no zeros!) made it to all three media types a few years ago but only in passing.
Today I heard that the World Health Organization came out with a report stating that second hand smoke is much less of a health hazard then previously claimed. (My impression is that they are saying it's negligable) I've only heard of that report on radio. When it was said that second hand smoke was a big problem it made all media forms.
Another example - anytime a gun makes it to school it makes national news. Recently there was a hand grenade brought to school locally, another student was terrorized with pipe bombs by another student (in fact his father lost a leg) and a number of other bomb incidents have made local news only. I haven't heard of any of them making national news (except for the threat sent via internet to NY from Portland). That leads me to believe they are happening across the country in much larger numbers but never getting national media attention unless multilple people actually die (ie Oklahoma vs local mad losing leg).
I could go straight down the line and on most *hot* topics the media concentrates on one side of the issue - reporting everything from the *politically correct* standpoint yet barely mentioning evidence to the contrary. Or they spin it. For example when the anti-abortion website case was appealed in favor of the anti-abortion people the newspaper headline read *Court protects abortion website*. You had to actually read the article to see it was an anti-abortion website.
So - Just how biased do you feel the media is and what type of media do you feel is the least biased? And how much of an impact do you feel this bias has on what we believe? And what are some example of media bias you feel exist?