Sanctity of Media
I have already written a post on Media and its role in a Democracy, in which I concluded that unbiased media is a must for Democracy to operate efficiently (a very well known fact). Now we are going to analyse how the highly skewed or biased media intentionally or unintentionally can change the course of natural flow of any news, or change the flow of news in a particular direction.
It is wrong to say that every-time every-thing has to be unbiased, because its not. The closest thing to unbiased I have witnessed is the scientific studies which are designed to be void of all emotional associations while presenting data and information.
To be human is to have biases as we all individuals have our prejudices, preferences and positions; to write or think without reflecting them in some way or the other is nearly impossible. In media sector, however, we have to try. Media person or journalists should be factual and as fair as the facts allow them to be. Well-executed journalism allows readers to trust the facts presented and let them explore the different angles to make their own decisions based on information that is complete as time and space allows.
Not every-time media has to be unbiased. That is why print media have editorial/ opinion sections and and electronic media have panel discussions. The primary job of the editorial/ opinion/ discussion is to help people understand and see all the possible sides (positives/ negatives/ good-effects/ side-effects etc) of the news being reported from the domain experts themselves. The problem arises when media side themselves with one or the other political parties or leaders, who have partisan views and spin everything for their benefits. By siding themselves, the media is damaging themselves and their reputation by not functioning as a tool to inform the public on actual facts of events, but instead have become influence brokers, activists, and fancy ideological political action committees for a party or person.
The free and unbiased media is supposed to report facts as they find them. It is not the journalist's job to tell the story from their own political slant, leanings, or what they desire the public to conclude. They are to report the facts and let the people arrive to their own conclusion. As we all know, politics is a dirty business and sometimes it is difficult to come to a conclusion one way or another, and sometimes it is difficult to fully grasp what is being objectively and unbiasedly reported.
The media is flawed and they often cover what they want or will make errors obviously. What people need to understand is that while bias is unavoidable, facts do exist and that's what ultimately have to hold the sources up to. Are they factual and if they are not, you can at the very least assess different level of bias.
It is wrong to say that every-time every-thing has to be unbiased, because its not. The closest thing to unbiased I have witnessed is the scientific studies which are designed to be void of all emotional associations while presenting data and information.
To be human is to have biases as we all individuals have our prejudices, preferences and positions; to write or think without reflecting them in some way or the other is nearly impossible. In media sector, however, we have to try. Media person or journalists should be factual and as fair as the facts allow them to be. Well-executed journalism allows readers to trust the facts presented and let them explore the different angles to make their own decisions based on information that is complete as time and space allows.
Not every-time media has to be unbiased. That is why print media have editorial/ opinion sections and and electronic media have panel discussions. The primary job of the editorial/ opinion/ discussion is to help people understand and see all the possible sides (positives/ negatives/ good-effects/ side-effects etc) of the news being reported from the domain experts themselves. The problem arises when media side themselves with one or the other political parties or leaders, who have partisan views and spin everything for their benefits. By siding themselves, the media is damaging themselves and their reputation by not functioning as a tool to inform the public on actual facts of events, but instead have become influence brokers, activists, and fancy ideological political action committees for a party or person.
The free and unbiased media is supposed to report facts as they find them. It is not the journalist's job to tell the story from their own political slant, leanings, or what they desire the public to conclude. They are to report the facts and let the people arrive to their own conclusion. As we all know, politics is a dirty business and sometimes it is difficult to come to a conclusion one way or another, and sometimes it is difficult to fully grasp what is being objectively and unbiasedly reported.
The media is flawed and they often cover what they want or will make errors obviously. What people need to understand is that while bias is unavoidable, facts do exist and that's what ultimately have to hold the sources up to. Are they factual and if they are not, you can at the very least assess different level of bias.
Great...
ReplyDelete