If news too scrupulously presents both sides of an issue too completely, it would be too long, and about as exciting as a thesis proposal. Sticking to the facts may be possible only with disaster reports, shipping schedules, and results of sports events. But even here, the follow-up stories look for who’s to praise or blame. Reporters then need to pick and choose which details to show in an unfolding story.
There are subtle ways of showing editorial bias while appearing to uphold balanced reporting. It’s better when discussing not statistics but personalities that can be cast as heroes (the dead bodies, usually) and villains (those who transformed the bodies from living to nonliving). Faces and personalities provide drama and prod people to marches and quests for justice.
There are other ways media organizations tilt reporting:
They select unflattering photos or video moments. This simple editorial prerogative allows media to feature a politician in mid-yawn or smirking at the speaker on the podium, or on a lectern being bleeped when provoked by a question about a UN visitor. The camera rolls on as the object of scorn is caught off-guard sneaking a thumb into the nostrils looking for lost paperclips. Such visuals need no voice-over to project grossness.
In a spousal conflict featuring one interviewer with two different interviewees on separate schedules, both sides have a chance to air their sides to promote the principle of balanced reporting. But bias can still be introduced in how the subject is interviewed.
Attempted statements can be cut off mid-sentence by the interviewer as inconsistencies with previous responses are aired — let’s look at this video clip. (You said before that the papers were just lying around on the desk, but didn’t you pry open a locked cabinet?) The interviewee is portrayed as deceitful and evasive.
Choosing emotionally charged modifiers and characterizations provide a particular spin. Crowds can be described as an unruly mob if a big one, or, if small, sparse, and having very short attention spans. The marchers can be referred to as a cross-section of different sectors of society indicating broad support or a motley assembly of jobless riff-raff. (Their banners come from one printing shop.) A new supporter can be written off as someone who just switched from the other side three hours ago out of conviction, or as an opportunistic move — the new evidence is compelling.
Man-on-the-street interviews offer a biased sample.
Out of 10 interviews, maybe three are aired. Which interviewee does the station choose? “He should just leave and not drag the commission down in his mud wrestling bout.” Or, “He still has the full support of the organization”. Anonymous interviewees can even be guided by the way the question is asked. They are seldom identified by name and occupation and seem to be hurrying off to the washroom when caught by the reporter — It’s all up to him.
Every news program now features tweets or text messages to show which side of an issue the viewers (representing the country) favor. Questions can be twisted to invite the desired results. “Are you in favor of sex education to teach various techniques in erotic stimulation in high schools giving way to teenage pregnancies and unwanted babies?” The unsurprising result supporting a “strongly disagree” is shown as a rejection of sex education in the high school curriculum.
Selection of stories to feature indicates the leanings of a media organization. Thus, a paper that features in its headline the possible bridal attire of a cosmetic surgeon marrying a younger reinstated doctor is probably in the good graces of the powers that be. Another media outlet that posts a front-page photo of policemen being grilled in a Senate investigation and looking like refugees fleeing a war zone with the caption “Killers?” is not going to win any raffle prizes in the Christmas media party.
Editorial bias determines what stories to feature and where to place them. While facts may be objective, the particular ones to report on can be selective. Ratings or circulation numbers also influence how the news is spun out. The more drama and conflict, the higher it seems is the audience interest.
Sure, media hysteria can be tiresome. But news has to compete with other distractions for the attention of its market. Unfortunately, it is noisy fights that attract the crowd… and the not-so-innocent bystanders.
A. R. Samson is chair and CEO of Touch DDB.
