(What is the real secret of Soylent Green?
Bias is hard to avoid, but it can be really damaging - leading us to make poor choices without fairly weighing up the facts.
As human beings, we all bring a point of view into the world, and that point of view colors how we learn about and interact with it. This is built up from the moment we are born and will continue to evolve until we die. With that in mind, we should always be aware that we cannot react to anything in a completely objective manner.
That same logic holds true for media. All news outlets are organizations and made up of people. This means that editors, reporters, commentators, and researchers that work in journalism bring their point of view to work with them every day, and it is borderline impossible for them to completely separate themselves from the stories they report. It is therefore logical to assume that even the hardest news will be colored, to a certain extent, by the person reporting it. At a microlevel, when looking at a story, this point of view can manifest itself in a variety of ways that we should be on the lookout for:
Value as fact: In softer news, the presenter might attempt to pass off their beliefs as fact. This is especially true of punditry and opinion sections (think Tucker Carlson, Rachel Maddow, Sean Hannity, or Stephen Colbert) where the presenter is often attempting to confirm their own worldview and make that worldview more presentable to the consumer. If a worldview or set of values is stated, we should automatically be on the lookout for bias in how the story is presented.
That same logic holds true for media. All news outlets are organizations and made up of people. This means that editors, reporters, commentators, and researchers that work in journalism bring their point of view to work with them every day, and it is borderline impossible for them to completely separate themselves from the stories they report. It is therefore logical to assume that even the hardest news will be colored, to a certain extent, by the person reporting it. At a microlevel, when looking at a story, this point of view can manifest itself in a variety of ways that we should be on the lookout for:
Value as fact: In softer news, the presenter might attempt to pass off their beliefs as fact. This is especially true of punditry and opinion sections (think Tucker Carlson, Rachel Maddow, Sean Hannity, or Stephen Colbert) where the presenter is often attempting to confirm their own worldview and make that worldview more presentable to the consumer. If a worldview or set of values is stated, we should automatically be on the lookout for bias in how the story is presented.
Presentation of the facts: In hard news, it’s important to keep an eye on how the facts are presented. Were questions left unanswered? Was information omitted that could have been vital to building a clear picture of events?
Credibility and accuracy of sourcing: Did the story source a diverse array of credible viewpoints and make the effort to flesh out who or what they are and put the information gleaned from them in context? The less you notice this in a story, the more on guard you should be for bias.
Cherry-picking: How are sources represented in the story? Are they analyzed in depth or just at a glance?
Sensationalism: Does the language in the headline or body provoke an emotional response? If it does, it’s likely that you’re consuming something intentionally biased and seeking to elicit that reaction to further the agenda of its author.
Commentary: Does the story draw a specific conclusion? Do they tell you in the presentation of facts whether they judge a source to be credible or portray them in a positive or negative light? In general, we should be skeptical of any reporting that attempts to pass judgement on a source. It may be accurate, but further research will be needed on the part of the consumers to independently confirm this judgement for themselves.
Fighting BIAS can be even harder than detecting it, especially when we already have strong preconceived opinions...
