How biased is the media really?

[Vorausen]

If you have ever spent at least a couple minutes in the realm of politics, you probably know at least a little bit about the complicated relationship between politicians and the press. It is summed up terribly a love and hate relationship. And time and time again the phrase “media bias” and “fake news” has been thrown around. But how true is this bias really, and is it really as big as some make it out to be.

My personal thoughts on media bias is that I do believe it is real, however I feel like it is exaggerated to a certain degree. Media bias is an over used phrase that people use for any news source they disagree with.

[Alaska Hawaii and the Aleutes]

My opinion: Every media is biased, so to find the truth we have to look at different sources. There are no exceptions.

[Nakena]

It's gotten worse over the past years because a new generation of activist type joined en masse the ranks of journalism. People who have a different ethos, mindset and background than previous generations of journalists.

[Jestar Falls]

My way of finding true non-biased info is by looking at many sources, then whenever the information overlaps, that must be the truth.

[Ushornaia]

At first, the media tried to be unbiased, but that clearly failed. Slowly the media chose sides and now here we are.

[Paddy O Fernature]

Laughably so, going one way or the other depending on the agency in question.

The days of actual journalism are dead.

[Ethel mermania]

Laughably so, going one way or the other depending on the agency in question.

The days of actual journalism are dead.

I would argue the days of actual journalism never existed.

REMEMBER THE MAINE!

[Whitemore]

Media these days only look for clickbait titles to get higher amounts of viewer engagements, of course when I say Media I mean the mainstream Media, news networks like NPR are still holding strong and they are my main source of information.

[Picairn]

Biased news is not fake news. Unless a news outlet decides to outright fabricate an event, normally it will report its own perspective of the event. In such cases, the reporting can be biased, but ultimately still true (at least in the core facts). It is up to you to disseminate the reports and decide whether this is the full representation of the facts, or some context is missing. In the end, though, calling a news article which you disagreed with "biased" is a lazy deflection. Since news is made by humans, and humans are biased, all news is biased anyway. Either refute the evidence presented, or provide missing context, or go.

The media is, surprisingly, not a monolithic bloc full of propagandists. There are networks that I consider to be very credible and least biased, such as AP, Reuters or C-Span. When my appetite craves for more deep analysis or Op-Eds into the content, context, or potential ramifications of an event, I seek for outlets that do better in this regard. Guess what? They are biased, because humans made them. And I don't mind that since I already know what I'm going for, I'm here to gain new insights into the problem.

[Paddy O Fernature]

Laughably so, going one way or the other depending on the agency in question.

The days of actual journalism are dead.

I would argue the days of actual journalism never existed.

REMEMBER THE MAINE!

That would be a fair argument to make.

[Senkaku]

It's gotten worse over the past years because a new generation of activist type joined en masse the ranks of journalism. People who have a different ethos, mindset and background than previous generations of journalists.

Journalists have always been "activist types," it's just that in the US of the 20th century, they all used to be activists/opinion leaders for a very narrow political spectrum of capitalist imperialism with slightly different degrees of cultural liberalism or conservatism.

The new media ecosystem just reduces unofficial state control over content and reduces elites' ability to form an ideological consensus that voters can then rally around, it doesn't fundamentally change something about journalism as a practice.

[Forsher]

It depends entirely where you live.

For example, the NZ Herald publishes (on its website) a lot of stuff that comes from other companies and there's really no rhyme nor reason to that. Oh, sure, I guess most of the stuff the Herald takes from The Spinoff is basically just fluff but the other contributing organisations are foreign. How do you fit this into a discussion about bias with, for example, an American? Would they even conceive of the international dimension to this borrowing as a possibility?

On the face of it, the Herald defies classification in terms like "the Herald is conservative/progressive/left-wing/right-wing". Rather, there are certain things that the Herald cares about which it yammers on about endlessly. I guess, on the whole, you'd have to say it keeps Orsman, Hosking, du Plessis-Allan and their like around more than Wilson or... I don't even know who else I could put here... so by that measure is neoliberal as fuck but the whole country is neoliberal as fuck so that mean anything? That the Herald basically just reproduces the same default framework of our entire system of governance? Probably not. And while Hosking's brand is based on his politics, journalists and radio hosts' being quasi celebrities is true in general in New Zealand so there's a lot of sharing of the same talking heads and columnists.

A student magazine once described the Herald as being pro-apathy, which I guess is kind of fair... it doesn't care about politics (other than "cars = good" since all those articles are invariably written by Bernard fucking Orsman) so much as it just cares about continuing on.

But then you look at organisations where it does seem rather clearer what they think. This tends to occur in larger markets where you're able to carve out an audience of partisans that's profitable. Mind you, I would characterise The Spinoff as being smug leftism but they're so smug they deliberately publish contrary points and they live in a market where they have (as a proportion) a lot of paid articles.

[Narland]

If you have ever spent at least a couple minutes in the realm of politics, you probably know at least a little bit about the complicated relationship between politicians and the press. It is summed up terribly a love and hate relationship. And time and time again the phrase “media bias” and “fake news” has been thrown around. But how true is this bias really, and is it really as big as some make it out to be.

My personal thoughts on media bias is that I do believe it is real, however I feel like it is exaggerated to a certain degree. Media bias is an over used phrase that people use for any news source they disagree with.

I expect 3 things from journalism regardless of bias:
1. Open and Honest Truthfulness -- Relaying the facts of a matter (the who, what, where, when, which, how and why without speculation, opinion, or gainsaying).
2. Rational Thought --Presenting the facts of the matter in plain language in succinct and coherent manner with all cogency.
3. Transparent Mediation -- The news media is merely a vessel to acquire intelligence in order for the recipients to make their own well formed opinions. The media is not the message, nor is it their business to tell me what is mine. Those who do are an offense who can go to a very hot place.

This is in contradistinction to Opinion Publicists and other entertainers -- Sean Hanmity, Bill Maher, Stephen Colbert; my neighbor with a hundred bumper stickers on his car, or any Stand-up Comic, whom I know are going to be subjective in their interpretation of human events. That I have no problem with.

The problem I have is when a media organization presents itself as a body of professional journalism but persistently fails to attain even the most rudimentary standards of the profession. They spew opinion as fact, tell others what they must think and feel, and attempt to manipulate emotions as if we were all immature children still in grammar school. This is where American news media has fallen flat on its face. It has ceased to uphold professional journalist standards, but wants its respect and accolades.

[SD_Film Artists]

It's gotten worse over the past years because a new generation of activist type joined en masse the ranks of journalism. People who have a different ethos, mindset and background than previous generations of journalists.

Indeed. I was once told by a journalism lecturer that "it's a good thing to be biased as it means you're passionate".

IMO having personal experience in a subject can bring valuable insight and passion to a documentary but at the end of the day if you're unable to play devil's advocate and give an objective assessment to the viewer then you're political salesman rather than a journalist, which brings me to another quote from a college guest; "PR guys are optmists, journalists are pessimists".

[Cekovia]

many journos love making things up. every kind of media lies about things insome way to Push their agenda and that is why u have to consult the word of God and your gut only

[J o J]

Just about all media and news outlets are biased today. The solution is to get your information from many sources, particularly from ones of opposite biases to hear each side. Very few unbiased sites or organizations exist, if you manage to find one then pat yourself on the back and enjoy it until it inevitably becomes biased too.

[Cekovia]

Just about all media and news outlets are biased today. The solution is to get your information from many sources, particularly from ones of opposite biases to hear each side. Very few unbiased sites or organizations exist, if you manage to find one then pat yourself on the back and enjoy it until it inevitably becomes biased too.

i think anyone claiming a journalistic source they like to be unbiased is probably simply deluding themselves into thinking that sources sharing their bias are unbiased . i dont believe such a thing Exists

[Aeritai]

Pretty much all media is bias depending what your political views are on certain things.

If you want unbiased news... I heard C-Span is pretty good.

[Kowani]

ah yes
"the media"
a monolith which all shares the same patterns of bias and outlook
fucking lol

[Ethel mermania]

ah yes
"the media"
a monolith which all shares the same patterns of bias and outlook
fucking lol

I am not seeing many folks say that. Each outlet has its own particular biases. NPR one way Fox the other.

[The Republic of Fore]

Saw a meme that rather sums up my feelings. Journalists in 1990: I'm feet away from grenades and gunfire, if these soldiers spot me I'm dead. But It's worth it to get my story. Journalists now: An anonymous source told me that trump said bing bong near a Chinese restaurant in 1970. When will white men admit all his supporters are nazis!?

[The Cazistan]

Most media sources in any given part of the world are either directly run by the government or heavily funded and usually censored by the government (to varying degrees). Manufactured outrage, media bias, artificial support, memory holing, etc. are all controlled by who's in charge of running the media behind the scenes, directly or indirectly.

[Kowani]

ah yes
"the media"
a monolith which all shares the same patterns of bias and outlook
fucking lol

I am not seeing many folks say that. Each outlet has its own particular biases. NPR one way Fox the other.

sigh
i agree that every outlet has its own biases
but saying "how biased is the media" encourages people to think if it as a singular entity-and because the phrase specifically used is bias, it limits the ability of people to think beyond baseline political bias as an example
hell, even talking about suspected "political bias" can obscure lenses of analysis, because outlets taken to be on one "side" can still advance the agenda of the other, even if they don't believe they're doing so (and i'm not just talking about CNN getting duped into airing a staged migrant crossing)

the framing of the debate is bad

[Chan Island]

If you have ever spent at least a couple minutes in the realm of politics, you probably know at least a little bit about the complicated relationship between politicians and the press. It is summed up terribly a love and hate relationship. And time and time again the phrase “media bias” and “fake news” has been thrown around. But how true is this bias really, and is it really as big as some make it out to be.

My personal thoughts on media bias is that I do believe it is real, however I feel like it is exaggerated to a certain degree. Media bias is an over used phrase that people use for any news source they disagree with.

Well this is a very limited OP.

Like, yes, media is biased, so? It's always been biased. Nowadays it's more visible because there is a much greater range of ideas that can be discussed in the current media landscape compared to, say, 40 years ago.

I'll effort post this later, but suffice to say for now most accusations of bias or fake news are for things that the press will fundamentally always have to be and have always had. Which is a damn shame, because it makes condemning the actual, full on liars and smear merchants so much harder.

[Ethel mermania]

I am not seeing many folks say that. Each outlet has its own particular biases. NPR one way Fox the other.

sigh
i agree that every outlet has its own biases
but saying "how biased is the media" encourages people to think if it as a singular entity-and because the phrase specifically used is bias, it limits the ability of people to think beyond baseline political bias as an example
hell, even talking about suspected "political bias" can obscure lenses of analysis, because outlets taken to be on one "side" can still advance the agenda of the other, even if they don't believe they're doing so (and i'm not just talking about CNN getting duped into airing a staged migrant crossing)

the framing of the debate is bad

The media isn't one thing, but a combination of many things agreed. they all have their point of view, and what you read, hear or see is expressed from that viewpoint. The media isn't an honest broker. That is how I am interpreting the point of the thread