Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Impact of mass media on public opinion
Mass media bias
Media influence on public opinion
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Impact of mass media on public opinion
Introduction This paper will cover the omnipresence of media biases and their implications in three news stories from various newspapers including The Washington Post, The Los Angeles Times and The New York Times through content-analysis and comparison. Matthew Gentzkow and Jesse M. Shapiro in “Media Bias and Reputation”from the Journal of Political Economy argue that media biases, distort information to make it conform with consumers’ prior [political] beliefs in order to shape reports in whatever way will be most likely to improve the reputations of media outlets [thus increasing future profits by expanding the demand for their products] (Gentzkow & Shapiro, 2006, pg. 282). Additionally, in Four Information Biases That Matter W. Lance Bennett suggests that biases in the the news overwhelmingly plays to the human-interest angle and fragments the stories. The prevalence toward personalization and fragmentation biases engages readers through conformation to prior beliefs, such as using bias to affect readers’ political leanings and ultimately increases demand for their publication through likability and inquisition caused by unclear, fragmented stories. Analysis The first article by Ed O’Keffe (“After government shutdown, dozens of lawmakers gave to charity” taken from the February 26, 2014 issue of The Washington Post) exhibits a noticeable clouding of the “big picture” due to personalization and fragmentation biases. These biases implicate an increase in demand for newspapers. The article examines an investigation into the claim that 116 U.S. lawmakers, following the government shutdown, pledged to donate part of their federal salaries to appease voters. Personalization bias refers to the tendency to downplay the big social... ... middle of paper ... ...ith a decrease of objective journalism and an increase in the demand for news products. Moreover, the prevalence of personalization and fragmentation biases affects readers’ political leanings and ultimately increases demand for their publication through likability and inquisition caused by unclear, fragmented stories. Given my findings, the news media, in order to improve its quality of news reporting should not only work to reduce or remove biases, such as personalization and fragmentation, from their articles but to strive for objectivity as well. These goals can be accomplished through a more focused and succinct writing and interviewing process; a process used to avoid a cloudy, unfocused, or misleading news article. Though entirely objective journalism is quite unattainable, taking steps to remove biases may aid in improving the quality of news reporting.
398).It is also stated that news divisions reduced their costs, and raised the entertainment factor of the broadcasts put on air. (p. 400). Secondly, the media determines its sources for stories by putting the best journalists on the case and assign them to areas where news worthy stories just emanates. (p.400). Third, the media decides how to present the news by taking the most controversial or relevant events and compressing them into 30 second sound-bites. (p.402). finally, the authors also explain how the media affects the general public. The authors’ state “The effect of one news story on public opinion may be trivial but the cumulative effect of dozens of news stories may be important. This shows a direct correlation between public opinions and what the media may find “relevant”. (Edwards, Wattenberg, Lineberry, 2015, p.
“The old argument that the networks and other ‘media elites’ have a liberal bias is so blatantly true that it’s hardly worth discussing anymore…No we don’t sit around in dark corners and plan strategies on how we’re going to slant the news. We don’t have to. It comes naturally to most reporters.” (Bias: A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distort the News) This example is tremendously important in the author’s discussion because it proves that news stories do manipulate people through bias. Popular news networks are viewed by thousands of people every single day, thus making it have a huge impact on the public since they believe what they see. When news reporters present their news segments, it is natural for them to give their insights due to human nature being instinctively biased. “The news media is [sic] only objective if they report something you agree with… Then they’re objective. Otherwise they’re biased if you don’t agree, you know.” (CNN’s American Morning) In this quote, the readers are presented to current panelists agreeing that news consumers have a very hard time separating their own view of the news from the perspective of the news reporters because they are presenting their own opinions throughout their segments. This problem exists once again because of the bias that is contained in media
Although, in recent years it is seen that consumers are less likely to subscribe to newspapers and/or watch the daily news. This is due to the fact that they are typically bias in their opinions, and are seen to lack the whole story when presented. Rise in polarization in the media is due to a new found competition between news networks, which was not present sixty years ago. Wilson says, “the news we get is not only more omnipresent, it is also more competitive and hence often more adversarial”. The media outlets are fighting for views, and are willing to do whatever it takes to get them. Which leads to them configuring the stories to what people want to here. Thus making their viewer ratings higher. It is known that certain news stations get more views depending on the political party. “Those who watch CNN are more likely to be Democrats than Republicans; the reverse is emphatically true of Fox”. The media has more outlets to reach their viewers to maximize the effectiveness of their biased
It is not uncommon to hear people complaining about what they hear on the news. Everyone knows it and the media themselves knows it as well. Some of the most renowned journalists have even covered the the media’s issues in detail. Biased news outlets have flooded everyday news. We find that journalism’s greatest problems lie in the media’s inability for unbiased reporting, the tendency to use the ignorance of their audience to create a story, and their struggles to maintain relevance.
The two key terms “agenda setting” and “gotcha” journalism are going to be used within this paper to show you how politicians and news organizations try to persuade the public. The “agenda setting” is a term that “involves using the news to influence what the public regards as important for them to think about in society and politics.” (Bennett, Lance pg. 23) This is a major tool for news organizations or politicians to seek a public relation toward a certain aspect that they’re addressing their agenda and framing it to formulate their partisan viewpoints. Now for “gotcha” jour...
Bernard Goldberg’s book, Bias, reveals the truth of journalism, rather than its art. He pinpoints the inevitability and reasoning behind the majority of the media, the nation’s informant, slanting the news in a liberal direction. Clear examples and statistics highlight the condition; denied by the media moguls, already identified by the country.
Bias in the media People all around the country watch the news everyday, the same stories the same places day after day. People are oblivious to how media bias is used in every kind of media everywhere; in the newspaper, magazines , and television. Media bias has existed since early media and will exist until it is known about and stopped. People are victims of media bias on an everyday basis without knowing so.
News sources in particular can use selective coverage of current or historical events to theoretically slant individuals’ perceptions of them. This type of partisan media also authorizes distinguished members of the favored group to gain increased coverage that helps to spread party preferences to the masses (Davis 277). Additionally, this coverage often includes clear directions to audiences about how to get involved in local politics (Kim 660-661). However, the effects of these directives and partisan cues are limited to individuals with like-minded political beliefs, as people “tend to accept positive perceptions of the favored candidate and negative perceptions of the opposed candidate when they are exposed to congenial media coverage” (Kim
The recent boom in technology is a factor in that. People are not solely tied to one news outlet. They are able to read the article on CNN, watch it on television, and see real-time footage of it on television. Though this research was thorough, the investigation was limited by a small pool of academics due to the search tools made available. It is understood that older scholars may have a stronger argument as to why objectivity is important during times of war, but there journals could not be uncovered. As journalism students complete their studying at their schools they will question the fairness with objectivity, and if it should be such a staple in the
During these difficult economic times sensationalism has become more prevalent in the media. Stories involving sex scandals and child murders have taken over our T.V and internet screens as well as the front pages of our newspapers. The media bias of sensationalism has been used as a sort of escapism for readers. Although it may seem that sensationalism has just started making waves, it has been around for decades. Sensationalism has been influencing viewers and contributing to media bias since the days of the penny press. Sensationalisms long history has been turbulent, self-serving, and influential to today’s reporting practices. With the influence over readers’ sensationalism’s media bias have and will continue to affect media reporting for years to come.
Public journalism has changed much during its existence. Papers are striving to actively involve readers in the news development. It goes beyond telling the news to embrace a broader mission of improving the quality of public life. The American style of journalism is based on objectivity and separates us from the bias found in most European partisan papers. American journalism is becoming too vigilant in being objective that the dedication to investigating stories tends to be missing in the writing. Public journalism works to incorporate concepts from partisan and objective writing to increase the flow of information and improve the quality of public life.
I recently read an article somewhere, in which BBC journalist Sigrun Rottman said that objectivity in journalism is an illusion and the media should think more of being balanced than being objective. According to her, objectivity in the media does not really exist. This hit home for me because before being a journalism student I believed that objectivity in journalism was undoubtedly the focal point of the profession and that the business of every journalist was to be objective. The truth and the reality of this belief as we know it and as I have come to understand is that objectivity in journalism really doesn’t exist or to put it in better terms, it doesn’t exist to the extent that we perceive it should. So, the oft-stated and exceedingly desired goal of modern journalism is objectivity - the ‘disconnected’ gathering and dissemination of news and information; this allows people to arrive at decisions about the world and events occurring in it without the journalist’s subjective views influencing the acceptance and/or rejection of the information. It’s a pity that such a goal is impossible to achieve! As long as humans gather and disseminate news and information, objectivity is an unrealizable dream.
Independence and impartiality in journalism have always been a significant principle in measuring the quality of journalistic materials. Impartiality requires neutral and unbiased coverage of the events. It means that the journalist must report only the facts and not a personal beliefs and emotions toward the facts. According to this standard, being objective means to present different sides of an argument and maintain a balance of viewpoints, avoiding manipulation of the audience. Author and former broadcast executive David Cox defines impartiality most clearly: “Impartiality involves no more than the attempt to regard different ideas, opinions, interests, or individuals with detachment” (Sambrook, 2012). However, the question of pure impartiality
“Power is the ability to define reality and to have other people respond to your definition as if it were their own (Nobles).” People fail to see responsible journalism as a crisis because it is so convenient to have news media make up your mind for you. The foundation of our personal philosophies stems from irresponsible journalism through the major news sources we consume, the exposure to less responsible entertainment, and the biased reporting enforcing negative stereotypes.
Commercial media represents archetypal platforms of a two-sided market; on one side, they offer information to their viewers, and on the other, they offer entertainment and adverts to their customers. In this paper I will argue that good journalism is undermined by commercial media due to the role of advertising and circulation as a source of revenue for media outlets. Both commercial media bias and the use of sensationalism demonstrates, unequivocally, that the commercial economics of the media conflict explicitly with its partisan politics. A model of advertising-free journalism will be explored to determine the viability of media that is free of commercial pressure. Additionally, defenders of commercial media will be examined in establishing the implicit influences of commercialism that cause unethical behaviour. Commercial incentive creates a conflict between good journalism and commercial media that is too great to be ignored or looked over, and thus the goal of informing viewers is often compromised.