We're going to be examining the problem of bias in the news. You're probably thinking, "I'm not prejudiced. So I would never be biased in my reporting or writing." But bias isn't the same thing as prejudice. Prejudice is a
deliberate negative feeling or attitude. Bias is a
tendency to assume a certain viewpoint, and bias is not always deliberate. And even if your work
is free of bias, you need to be a critical observer of the news media and have a greater understanding of bias in reporting. Because it happens. All the time.
Bias can occur in many ways, particularly through:
- Selection and omission of specific details
- Placement of a story
- Choice of sources
- Word choice and tone
- Headlines
- Photos and camera angles
- Captions
- Names and titles
- Statistics
So we'll explore how and why bias occurs. For now, click
here to examine how two articles cover the same news event in much different way.
I did not know there was a difference between bias and prejudice. I now know that bias is a somewhat unconcious act as I'm sure it was in the two articles. The AP article made it seem as if the Iraqi planes attacks us even though the other article states it was not confirmed if they even left the ground. The AP article also puts Americans in the spotlight even though they were flying for the UN. The other article seems somewhat less biased in that they do not put the blame on the Iraq, however, they only took direct quotes from UN officials and did not state that the flyers were American. Both articles are at fault which shows how easily an article can sound biased if the writer isn't careful.
ReplyDeleteI was not sure if I would be able to tell when someone was being bias in writing or not but after reading the articles it was fairly easy. I could tell that the article on the AP was very biased where as the Reuters article was not very biased. The AP article was sort of like an attack agaisnt Iraq in my opinion. They seemed to paint a lot of the information about Iraq in a negative color almost as if they did not like the country. The other article was informational yet it did not take a side on this dispute unlike AP article.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI did not know being bias was not always deliberate but it does make since because you can judge someone without even thinking about it. As soon as you see someone you can already be judging them and it's like second nature to you. In regards to the articles, the AP was did express bias. The tone in the article seemed kind of aggressive and as if they were condemning Iraq. The other article only displayed information but I did not sense any bias. In the AP article, even the quotes use such as "But Iraq 'raised a fuss.'" The headline was also aggressive. It said the Iraqi jets "forced" the American planes to abort their mission. The article could've said it simply caused the American planes to end their mission. The article however, failed to mention the planes were American. This article also quoted the incident as being a "misunderstanding" and "blown out of proportion." Language used in this article and the other one, although unintentional, causes the reader to believe bias is present. It also causes the reader, if he/she has not read any other articles, to choose a side or believe information that is bias and somewhat inaccurate or missing other details.
ReplyDeleteI always thought bias and prejudice were the same thing, so it was really interesting for me to read this blog post. When I read the first story it didn't seem to be all that biased to me. But after I clicked on the highlighted words and read why they were biased, it made a lot of sense. I felt that the second story was more evidently biased then the first story because of the word usage in some of the paragraphs. Now I see why it is really easy for reporters to write biasly in their articles.
ReplyDeleteUntil I read this post I didn't know that there was a difference between bias and prejudice, so I enjoyed learnign that little bit of information. By reading these two articles it has become clear how easy it is for reporters to be biased in their stories. In my opinion, the second story seemed very biased and I felt that I could have caught those mistakes even without scrolling over them. In the first story I didn't realize many of the mistakes that the reporter made until I scrolled over them.
ReplyDeleteIt was interesting to read the two articles and somewhat dissect them for bias, because it demonstrated how a simple choice of word or presentation of information can create a biased article. Bias is a huge problem in today's journalism... the second article was overtly and clearly biased, but the Reuters article was a bit more subtle. A reader could be easily influenced by the hidden bias in these articles if they didn't bother to look at multiple sources or actively search for bias in the article, which does not coincide with the spirit of good journalism.
ReplyDeleteI'm sure it's difficult for journalists to write without bias, because no matter what you write someone can find a way to take offense to it. These articles actually made me examine myself as a reader because I didn't catch on the bias immediately. Either way, it's important for journalists to avoid this so people can make their own judgements based on facts and not the influence they receive from the writer's opinion.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading both of the articles, I seemed to understand what being biased really means. In the AP article, the writer seems to be putting the blame on Iraq and making them the cause of the problem. Also, the author only put in quotes that supported his or her stance on the issue. In the Rueters article, you got to hear from both sides of issue, people who thought it was just a clear misunderstanding and people who blamed one side or the other. Although some words in the Rueters articles were biased, it wasn't as blatant as the AP article. I can understand how easy it would be to put your own personal beliefs into an article, but I also see how important it is to be objective so your readers don't feel ignored.
ReplyDeleteIt was really intersting to see the difference in the two articles. When the articles were placed side-by-side, you could really tell that one was more bias then the other. The AP article was much more bias than the Reuters artcle. The AP article using verbs and vocabulary that made it clear that the reporter was showing a strong dislike towards Iraq. The Reuters article was a better example of journalism because it used unbias verbs and vocabulary.
ReplyDeleteBefore reading this blog, I thought that bias and prejudice were the same thing, but now I realize that reporters came sound biased without even knowing it. Looking at the articles side-by-side, it was easier to tell that the AP article was more biased than the Reuters article. It was clear that the AP reporter strongly disliked Iraq through the verbs and word choice in the article. Although the Reuters article still had some bias, it was subtle, and without the highlighting, I probably would not have noticed it.
ReplyDeleteTo be quite honest I thought bias and predjudice were synonyms for each other. After reading the article i now realize i was clearly wrong. After I read through both articles for the first time I realized i had trouble picking out the bias and predjuice information. It was helpful to go over and scroll through the articles and understand that its easier than you think to write a bias report. Im glad i got to read two of these examples, I think its important for every journalist to have a clear understanding of this.
ReplyDeleteLaura N.
ReplyDeleteI never thought bias and prejudice were different from each other. It seems very hard for reporters to write in a way that is not biased. In the AP article, the writer seems quick to blame Iraq for the problems, when jounalists aren't supposed to have an opinion.
We are studying media and politics this week in my AP Gov class. I found this blog post and discussion quite interesting, and it made me glad I will have so many senior journalism students in my class when we get into similar topics.
ReplyDeleteIt was strange for me to hear that biased and prejudiced were two separate concepts. I was not aware that being prejudiced was a deliberate action. This makes it much different from being biased, considering how easy it is for one to showed their biased thoughts without meaning to.
ReplyDeleteThe website showed very clearly a few points in which one can easily show their biased opinions. Even not saying something, or omitting a fact, can be considered biased. I had never thought of this before. It makes me think that everything about your article, even the order in which you place your facts, your arrangement of words, your positioning of quotes, can make you seem biased or unbiased. This all makes me a bit paranoid when it comes to writing full articles. I found myself looking back at the assignments I have already written to try to find ways that I could have come across with a different viewpoint than another writer would have.
This seems like it will be an interesting section!