Balance vs. bias in the media was the topic of discussion in this edition of the NPR show, Talk of the Nation. The program was fairly long so I'll give a very brief summary. Michel Martin, the host; Jeffrey Dvorkin, NPR ombudsman; Brent Cunningham, managing editor of the Columbia Journalism Review; and Jeff Jarvis, media executive and blogger at buzzmachine.com, discuss how balance is not just a left-wing, right-wing issue, but that there are multiple sides to every story. Listeners want news to reflect their bias - whatever it might be.
They also discussed the problems caused by attempting to be impartial. According to Dvorkin, listeners want journalists to draw conclusions for them. However, journalists are often wary about making these connections because they believe it will be considered bias.
Jarvis argues the best way to overcome this problem is by being transparent about your biases. According to Jarvis, just because a reporter openly says they are for or against the Iraq war does not mean they cannot be impartial. It merely lets the reader know the possible bias in what they are reading.
The part of the discussion about journalist not drawing conclusions is extremely relevant for editors. It is the editor’s job to help lead the writer and point out parts of the story they are missing. Even though it might be seen as bias, editors should push writers to make these connections. By ignore them, they are doing a disservice to the reader.
I never really thought of it that way. In all of our journalism classes, we're always taught to be impartial. The fact that the public may now want journalists to acknowledge their biases is a completely new concept to me. I understand that though; I guess some people need to know other's opinion about something before they draw their own conclusions.
ReplyDelete