The need for media objectivity in reporting conflict The media, both print and electronic, can play an important role in defusing tension, reducing and containing conflicts. It can do so by being deeply aware of the fragility of a country's' social fabric, of the efforts being expended at unifying a country's polarized and ethnicised politics and more importantly by objectively reporting conflict incidences as they unfold. However, recent reports appearing in cross sections of mainstream print media in Kenya has cast a pale shadow on the role, neutrality and objectivity of media in reporting conflicts. A good case is when one of the respected dailies in Kenya reported that suspected Pokot raiders from East Baringo attacked a Turkana manyatta in Baragoi, Samburu district driving away 3,000 camels, 100 cattle and 100 donkeys! This kind of "alarmist" reporting provokes pertinent questions. What this entails is that as a watchdog, the media should give credit where it is due and criticism where appropriate. no comments
Newsweek Examines The "Myth" Of Media Objectivity Newsweek: She tried to make a joke of it. At the debate in Cleveland last week, Hillary Clinton brought up a "Saturday Night Live" skit about journalists fawning over Barack Obama at a mock debate. "Maybe we should ask Barack if he's comfortable and needs another pillow," said Clinton. Humor is often a substitute for anger, and if Clinton wasn't all that funny, maybe it is because she is sore at the press for seeming to go easier on her opponent. She has a point, but the truth about the media and the campaign cannot be caricatured simply as the deification of Obama and the hounding of Clinton. The pols and the people invest the press with great power. Certainly, there are editors and publishers who would like to be kingmakers, or just kings. The mainstream media (the "MSM" the bloggers love to rail against) are prejudiced, but not ideologically. Keep reading Read the whole story: Newsweek
The Media - Objectivity Journalists often claim that their own biases and the pressures from advertisers and media owners do not affect their work because of their professional norm of 'objectivity'. Journalistic objectivity has two components. The first is 'depersonalisation' which means that journalists should not overtly express their own views, evaluations, or beliefs. The second is 'balance' which involves presenting the views of representatives of both sides of a controversy without favouring one side.(Entman 1989, p. 30; Nelkin 1987, p. 91) Associated conventions include: authoritative sources, such as politicians must be quoted (in this way the journalist is seen to distance him- or herself from the views reported, by establishing that they are someone else's opinions); 'fact' must be separated from 'opinion', and 'hard news' from 'editorial comment'; and the presentation of information must be structured pyramidically, with the most important bits coming first, at the 'top' of the story. Ben H.
Media bias Bias within the mass media Media bias is the bias of journalists and news producers within the mass media in the selection of many events and stories that are reported and how they are covered. The term "media bias" implies a pervasive or widespread bias contravening of the standards of journalism, rather than the perspective of an individual journalist or article. The direction and degree of media bias in various countries is widely disputed.[1] There are a number of national and international watchdog groups that report on bias of the media. Types[edit] The most commonly discussed types of bias occur when the (allegedly partisan) media support or attack a particular political party,[6] candidate,[7] or ideology. In 2000, D'Alessio and Allen studied three possible sources of media bias:[8] Based on the findings of Gentzkow, Shapiro, and Stone, they summarize two forms of media bias in the literature driven by different motivations: demand-driven bias and supply-driven bias. History[edit]
An Argument Why Journalists Should Not Abandon Objectivity In “Losing the News: The Future of the News that Feeds Democracy,” published by Oxford University Press, Alex S. Jones, a 1982 Nieman Fellow and director of the Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy at Harvard University, describes in its prologue his purpose and intent in writing about the “genuine crisis” in news. “It is not one of press bias, though that is how most people seem to view it,” he contends. “Rather, it is a crisis of diminishing quantity and quality, of morale and sense of mission, of values and leadership.” In this excerpt from the chapter “Objectivity’s Last Stand,” Jones reminds readers how objectivity assumed its role in the tradition of American journalism, what “authentic journalistic objectivity” looks like when practiced well, and why it matters so much to the future of news reporting. I define journalistic objectivity as a genuine effort to be an honest broker when it comes to news. But what, exactly, was objective journalism?
Media bias Media bias is the bias or perceived bias of journalists and news producers within the mass media in the selection of events and stories that are reported and how they are covered. The term "media bias" implies a pervasive or widespread bias contravening the standards of journalism, rather than the perspective of an individual journalist or article. The direction and degree of media bias in various countries is widely disputed. Practical limitations to media neutrality include the inability of journalists to report all available stories and facts, and the requirement that selected facts be linked into a coherent narrative.[1] Government influence, including overt and covert censorship, biases the media in some countries, for example North Korea and Burma.[2] Market forces that result in a biased presentation include the ownership of the news source, concentration of media ownership, the selection of staff, the preferences of an intended audience, and pressure from advertisers.
Media Bias 101: What Journalists Really Think -- and What the Public Thinks About the Media Decades of Research Showing What Journalists Think, How Journalists Vote, What the Public Thinks About the Media, and What Journalists Say About Media Bias Media Bias 101 summarizes decades of survey research showing how journalists vote, what journalists think, what the public thinks about the media, and what journalists say about media bias. The following links take you to dozens of different surveys, with key findings and illustrative charts. A printer-friendly, fully-formatted 48-page version of the report (updated January 2014) is available in PDF format here (1.8 MB). Part One: What Journalists Think Surveys over the past 30 years have consistently found that journalists — especially those at the highest ranks of their profession — are much more liberal than rest of America. Early Polls of Journalists, 1962-1985 Added January 2014Exhibit 1-1: The Media EliteExhibit 1-2: Major Newspaper Reporters Updated January 2014Exhibit 1-3: The American JournalistExhibit 1-4: U.S.
Objectivity vs. Neutrality: One in the same? | iMedia blogger Objective: “Undistorted by emotion or personal bias; based on observable phenomena.” According to several Web definitions, those characteristics make up the term that journalism organizations strive to maintain in the news. But according to Robert McChesney in “The Political Economy of Media,” achieving objectivity is a losing battle. “Journalism cannot actually be neutral or objective,” McChesney states, arguing that decision making about news worthiness and prominence of certain stories over others negates the idea that objectivity can be attainable. Take a small-town paper for instance: How can an editor “objectively” choose between a lead story about the crisis in Haiti and a devastating car wreck involving members of the community? The answer: It would depend. But this brings me to another issue. Like this: Like Loading...
Media Manipulation and Public Relations The media are accused of bias by people from both ends of the political spectrum, but journalists, editors and owners maintain that they provide an objective source of news. This chapter will consider the ways in which the news is shaped and how this in turn influences the way environmental issues are reported and constructed in the mass media. In the United States, where the debate over media objectivity is most heated, conservatives criticise the media for having a ‘liberal’ bias and these critics focus on the personal views of journalists, editors and media owners who, they argue, tend to be elitist, left-leaning and politically correct. A number of books have been published recently highlighting this supposed liberal bias including Press Bias and Politics: How the media frame controversial issues (Kuypers 2002), Bias: A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distort the News (Goldberg 2003b) and Arrogance: Rescuing America from the Media Elite (Goldberg 2003a). Background to the Issues