Bias in the media

By James Lewis

“’[Media] is like a feral beast, just tearing people and reputations to bits’ – statement by outgoing UK Prime Minister Tony Blair to the Reuters Institute, 12 June 2007” (Baldwin, p.550, 2006)

British newspapers can be classified through a range of distinctions such as frequency of editions (Dailies vs. Sundays), coverage (Nationals vs. Regionals), political stance (Conservatives vs. Liberal), and style (Broadsheet vs. Tabloid).

A majority of British newspapers make no attempt to be unbiased, but rather, they reveal their stance on issues in a range of explicit and subtle ways. This influence can be seen as a form of “social power”, that is, “the control exercised by one group or organisation (or its members) over the actions and/or the minds of (the member of) another group, thus limiting the freedom of actions of the others, or influencing their knowledge, attitudes and ideologies” (van Dijk, 1996, 84; as cited in Gabrielatos and Baker, 2008, p.5). This social power could be manifested through the prerogative of the press, seen collectively, to decide on the amount certain incidents’ get coverage. Therefore newspapers select, highlight, or reject content and decide on the extent and frequency of coverage according to their editorial policy or agenda (Gordon and Rosenberg, 1989, 4; Statham, 2002, 395; Greenslade, 2005, as cited in Gabrielatos and Baker, 2008).

In general, scholars agree upon that media plays a role in the process of public learning and engaging in politics. Newton (1999, as cited in Vreese and Boomgaarden, 2006) found that people who read broadsheet newspapers and news on the television were more positively associated with knowledge and political mobilization, which was reversed when considering tabloid readers who watched television that was not news related. This correlates with Boykoff’s research from 2008 on the style of newspapers (Broadsheet and Tabloid), where it is important to consider the demographics of the readers of tabloid and broadsheet papers.

The National Readership Survey (NRS) social grades are a common UK demographic classification scheme that is based on the occupation of the highest paid member of the household. While these may simplify intricacies in positions of class in society, they do help with revealing the clear socio-economic differences of readership habits between tabloid and broadsheet newspapers. Readers were defined as A (upper middle class), or B (middle class) which were over half of the broadsheet newspaper readers, while C (lower middle class/skilled working class), D (working class) and E (underclass) were the majority of people who read tabloids (Newspaper Marketing Agency (NRS), 2007, as cited in Boykoff, 2008).

Grouped by broadsheet and tabloid newspapers, the 2007 Newspaper Marketing Agency figures show that while 60% of broadsheet newspapers are read by the NRS social grade of A and B, this just makes up just 20% of tabloid readers. Whereas, the largest number of people who read British tabloids are the socio-economic categories referred to as ‘working class’.

It is known, that tabloids have historically focused coverage on crime, disasters, sex, accidents, political scandal and conflict, celebrity gossip, , and sport (Connell, 1998; Sparks & Tulloch, 2000, as cited in Boykoff, 2008), although in recent times there has been more on reporting on environmental issues. This suggests that there are different kinds of people from all areas of life who read different styles of newspapers, indicating that each style is catering for a certain audience, therefore employing different styles of writing, vocabulary and what story gets focus, which coincides with what Vreese and Boomgaarden (2006) found as different socio-economic classes have different agendas when it comes to politics.

The main source of information still comes from the media, such as newspapers, where people usually gain their political, economic and other news (Boykoff and Rajan, 2007), which can cause a problem sometimes as the major media organizations around the world, such as the BBC and CNN, are profit driven entities (Wong, 2005), causing bias’ in the stories. Lad and Lenz (2009) showed strong evidence of persuasion in British newspapers, to persuade readers to vote for Labour in the 1997 election. This was clear in, the Sun newspaper, which at the time had the largest circulation in Britain. It swapped their support for the Conservatives to Labour (Mc-Nair 2003; Norris 1998; Seymour-Ure 1997, as cited in Lad and Lenz, 2009). This shift happened with a front-page endorsement of Tony Blair on the second day of the official 1997 campaign (McNair 2003, as cited in Lad and Lenz, 2009). The front page labelled Blair as a “strong, dynamic, purposeful leader” whom Britain was “crying out for” (Scammell and Harrop 1997, 160, as cited in Lad and Lenz, 2009) and finished the campaign with an election day cover photo of Blair and a banner headline proclaiming, “IT MUST BE YOU” [caps in original] (179, http://www9.georgetown.edu/faculty/jml89/LaddLenzBritishInternetAppendix.pdf. as cited in Lad and Lenz, 2009)During this time the Sun, three smaller newspapers also switched from no endorsement in 1992 to a Labour endorsement in the 1997 election. These were the Daily Star, Independent, and Financial Times (Lad and Lenz, 2009).

The government can use newspapers to persuade people to think in a way that they want to, but the newspapers can also use the government to support their stories and/or campaigns to help persuade people to back a particular ideal, for example the Prime Minister at the time Gordon Brown supported a campaign ‘Banish the Bags’, by the Daily Mail and from 27th February 2008, distribution of free shop carrier bags had stopped (Burgess, 2010).

Newspapers play an active role in highlighting risk controversies (Hansen, 2000, as cited in Burgess, 2010), such as the long term risk of mobile phone from radiation, which can lead to a majority of people who rely on newspapers for their understanding of health issues (Boykoff and Rajan, 2007), to panic and start to worry, without actually researching it from themselves, making media a powerful influence on public engagement with risk issues (Smith and Joffe, 2009).

Clearly there are biases, persuasion and propaganda in the news, but is it wrong for them to use these techniques? The answer to that is no according to Paul and Elder (2006). They say that in each society and culture, there is a unique world view, which affects what and how they see it. The news in the cultures of the world reflects the world in view of the culture for which they write. However, the truth is a lot more complicated than what each culture reports. One needs to become a critical reader and come to terms with the truth and read accordingly. Critical thinking is a complex set of skills that helps reverse what is naturally instinctive in human thought. Therefore, the uncritical mind is unconsciously driven to identify to the truth that is in accordance with a number of tacit maxims, for example, “It’s true if I believe it.” Whereas the critical thinker would consciously seek the truth which corresponds with instinct correcting maxims, such as, “I believe it, but it may not be true.” Mainstream news coverage works in similar fashion and operates on these maxims: “This is how it appears to us from our point of view; therefore, this is the way it is.” “These are the facts that support our way of looking at this; therefore, these are the important facts.” “These countries are friendly to us; therefore, these countries deserve praise.” “These countries are unfriendly to us;
therefore, these countries deserve criticism.” “These are the stories most interesting or sensational to our readers; therefore, these are the most important stories in the news.” (Paul and Elder, 2006, p.2) Just like Gabrielatos and Baker (2008) said about media, they don’t hide the fact they use these maxims, however according to Paul and Elder (2006), you need to be a critical reader to create a sense of objectivity and truthfulness in stories produced by the news who have become sophisticated in the ability of persuasion.

Do you agree/disagree that the media is biased? Do you agree/disagree with anything I have wrote about.

Let us know your opinion.