I'm a baby boomer,
and it amazes me how many of my contemporaries almost brag that they
don't watch the news or read newspapers. They have no shortage of
opinions though, so it begs the question: where do you get the
information that formulates those incessant opinions?
As a
career journalist, I'd advise anyone of any generation to be a
wide-ranged consumer of information, never gleaning all your intel
from just one or two sources. I've never bought into the conspiracy
theories about the media, having never seen any hard evidence of it
firsthand after more than a decade in the industry. (Instances have
certainly been documented beyond my limited experience.) But the fact
remains, there is only so much airtime. There are only so many column
inches. The real bias lies in what editors chose to cover and what
they leave on the cutting room floor or never send a crew out to
cover. The very process of elimination that is the heart of daily or
hourly production meetings is where the real prejudice lies. And
there is no way to remove that human factor from the process. A
limited number of people decide what the news is every day. That's
not going to change.
Which is why the Internet is such a great
tool for informing the public, but buyer beware. Forums and blogs are
not news organizations. No one is editing or fact-checking. No one is
certainly writing retractions or corrections. You can access myriad
news organizations and public records via the Net. Pick a couple that
are perceived to be liberal, a few that are perceived to be
conservative, and a couple who have the reputation for being "Just
the facts, ma'am." (If you're not a Boomer, you might not get
that reference!) Educate yourself to the difference between news
reporting and commentary - then read some of both.
In my first
journalism course as a freshman at the University of Georgia (one of
the country's most prestigious J-schools - a little bias from a
grad!) they showed us a film (it was the Dark Ages) of three news
anchors reading the same story. One had been directed to read it with
a positive spin, one with a negative spin, and one as impartially as
he possibly could. Our assignment was to determine which was which.
After much heated debate, we pooled our answers and they broke down
as an even number of votes for each observed bias between all three
anchors. Then we were told each anchor had been directed to read the
story as objectively as they could. The bias was on our part as the
audience and what we were watching for. All I'm saying is it was an
interesting exercise in human nature.
Simply put: if you only
have one source of information on a regular basis, YOU are as biased
as the organizations you are criticizing. Be a smart consumer of
news, then let's hear those opinions. You'll have something to say
that is worth hearing.
All Writing.Com images are copyrighted and may not be copied / modified in any way. All other brand names & trademarks are owned by their respective companies.
Generated in 0.08 seconds at 1:39am on Nov 24, 2024 via server WEBX2.