There's always been a lot of shouting on both sides of the political spectrum about biased news reporting on both sides of the media. These arguments are actually pretty different from how they present themselves. If that made sense.
Look at the things around you right now. Maybe you're in your room, maybe you're outside. But look around. Do it. Right now. Observe everything around you. Now take a small part of your environment, and in your mind, try to turn it into a news headline. American Idol Still a Bad Show, Seat Currently Uncomfortable Says Ass.
Done?
Whatever headline you made, hold it in your head. Now look at everything else you didn't make into a headline. You picked something out of that other stuff and made it news. News-worthiness is not an objective attribute of something. You made a personal value judgement about deciding what to make into news Everything else around you was exactly as newsworthy, but you chose something.
All news is an inherent personal value judgement. While it may seem obvious that a headline should say 18-Car Accident on Freeway, there is no objective reason why it couldn't also be (regarding the exact same thing) Teens, Bored in Traffic, Decide to Play 'I Spy'. Newsworthiness is a choice.
Accusing someone of biased news reporting assumes the existence of unbiased news reporting. However, as I've discussed before, all news is a value judgement. There is no such thing as unbiased news. When people accuse others of reporting the news biased or unfairly, all they're really saying is 'your frame of reference is very different than mine, and I don't like it.'
The take-away point of this? I have no idea. I just thought it was something kinda interesting to think about.
No comments:
Post a Comment