Today, news comes with an angle or an opinion. Ask anyone on the street where FOX or CNN politically stand and they could answer with certainty. They know that standing because its reflected in how the station reports their stories, which stories they ignore or what perspective they look at a story. This has led to many controversies surrounding news corporations pushing conservative or liberal biases on their audience; biases which the corporations deny.
Just over one hundred years ago the American government passed the Newspaper Publicity Act (NPA) of 1912. In essence, the NPA was created to regulate the newspaper industry after years of reporters writing fake news stories around selling sponsored products. In addition to unregulated illegal back dealings, there were secret political owners who used their papers to promote their own interests in both business and the election season. This is not to say that all newspapers were corrupt; some were straightforward and fully in support of the Act. In the end, the Act was passed. It took some time to implement but the NPA has been a relative success. Owners of newspapers are public knowledge, advertisements are clearly labeled with a small helpful title identifying them as “Advertisements” and there’s far more regulation.
Over the past century, news media has drastically changed their techniques but not their ideologies, which is to report the news. News, by definition, is the reporting of noteworthy information. That is, all news is supposed to be is news. Meaning there should only be the relation of facts with a completely neutral influence. This is the news cycle the NPA was attempting to create, regardless of the medium.
This desire for “no comment” reporting ironically runs parallel with a time of encouraged commenting. In today’s media saturated world, where there are hundreds of thousands of sites dedicated to publishing each individual’s opinion on any matter, can there really be any other expectation from the reporters who are paid to do it everyday? These reporters who are paid by news corporation owners who need advertisers and sponsors to keep the news going. Should the reporters or the owners be held to a higher standard? If so, how?
Comments (63)
MISHA:
Sep 15, 2013 at 06:15 PM
If we would be living in the perfect world then I would say yes, the reporters and owners should be held to a higher standard and report news in unbiased manner. But we are living in the world where news corporations promote their interests and political agendas. The news corporations are competing for "audience" and it is up to the public and their choice in consumption of news media and what type of news it finds noteworthy.
Ed:
Sep 16, 2013 at 01:58 PM
I completely agree regarding the "competing for the audience" most of the news stations these days go for shock value than anything.
Jessica:
Sep 16, 2013 at 07:57 PM
You are right, the news corporations are more concerned about getting more viewers, and the best way to do it is by the "shock" factor.
Imad Taylor:
Sep 17, 2013 at 12:20 PM
I agree I feel as if the news corporation is focus on more how much money they are making rather than the quality or importance of the news that it airing out
DeMarquis:
Sep 19, 2013 at 04:17 PM
I agree in a way, however it's one thing to use the phrase "in a perfect world" then to actually voice our opinions to the people who control the outlet of information. I believe we are the one's who create "a perfect world" by giving our attention to certain forms of media & we should never settle with acknowledging that this is NOT a perfect world & do our best to identify & correct the flaws in our media by stating that we only want & DESERVE strictly neutral stand points from our media.
MISHA:
Sep 15, 2013 at 06:47 PM
Yes, the reporters and owners should be held to higher standard of news reporting. This could be achieved by the viewers choice of following up only on the noteworthy, unbiased news reporting. In my opinion biased news reporting is still around because it has its audience, same as tabloids or gossip columns did by Walter Winchell in 1930s. We as a viewers and consumers of the news product have the responsibility to treat each news critically therefore we ourselves influence the way the news is brought to us.
Jose M.:
Sep 19, 2013 at 02:09 PM
Before the rise of professional journalism, and the conception of media ethics, newspapers reflected the opinions of the publisher. Now a days it reflect the opinions of whoever pay more.
Morgan:
Sep 15, 2013 at 09:16 PM
I think that there should definite line drawn between the opinion of a reporter and how they display the news to the people. If a reporter gives the news to us and throws their opinion in, it's going to make the people recieving the news feel a certain way. Like stated in the article, there are plenty of places for everyone to post their opinions online. A reporter can post their opinion anywhere just like everyone else, but it should not be added into their news reports.
Jessica:
Sep 16, 2013 at 07:52 PM
I completely agree with you. The way that the news is reported tends to make the viewers feel a certain way about the subject being reported on.
reina:
Sep 17, 2013 at 01:44 PM
I agree with your comment because a news reporter is doing their job and at a job you need to be professional. A reporter allowing their emotions to get the best of them is not professional or look good on the corporation. A reporter should express their opinions and true feelings on their own time rather than on the news.
Ed:
Sep 16, 2013 at 12:47 PM
I actually have two views on this question. A huge part of me does believe that News Corporations should have an opinion and be able to state it, however it is up to us to decide whether we agree or disagree with that opinion. We can easily just change the channel or cancel our subscription if we don't agree.
But on the other hand when I turn on the news, which I am not going to lie, isn't too often. I just want to watch the top stories, what is actually happening in the world and be able to form my own opinion, not have the facts delivered to me possibly exaggerated mixed up with the news casters' point of view.
Jessica:
Sep 16, 2013 at 08:01 PM
I agree. We do have the option to change the channel or just unsubscribe to the paper. But we are still consuming some of their information before we decide to switch to something else. So even though we don't like what they have to say, something they might have said, might stick with us and influence out thoughts from then on.
Misha:
Sep 17, 2013 at 11:40 AM
I agree with Ed. We do have the freedom to change the channel and maybe instead of consuming biased based news from FOX or CNN check out the Al Jazeera America?
Roman:
Sep 18, 2013 at 02:10 PM
I have yet to see that channel. How is Al Jazeera America different?
misha:
Sep 18, 2013 at 11:33 PM
Objective news reporting and noteworthy type of news is what's Al Jazeera in America is all about.
Morgan:
Sep 17, 2013 at 05:06 PM
I totally agree with this. It goes along with my first comment and I do think you make a good point how when we turn on the news, we want to hear the stories. We are not really interested in the opinion of the reporter.
Mark:
Sep 17, 2013 at 08:36 PM
I think the fact that everyone wants new to be unbiased is a part of a younger generation. Most people who are from an older generation will say which news station they like more because of their political views. I think this is because they were raised in a time period when people were more opinionated than they are now. However, most younger people believe that opinions should be kept out of news, so maybe, in time, news will become more objective.
DeMarquis:
Sep 19, 2013 at 04:35 PM
This is a good observation & there is good reason for it. As the older generation grew in age when media became more digital, they were consuming it routinely & were taught to believe with full faith in our government & the media we were being introduced to. However in a FULLY immersed digital generation, young adults are beginning to open their eyes to how harmful the propaganda of mass media can be to not only what goes on in our environment but even with the information that we personally reproduce. To one who only looks for facts in media rather than highly opinionated suggestions, it is easy to see right through 90% of media that is being controlled by higher news programs.
kspeed94:
Sep 19, 2013 at 05:44 PM
I agree. When I see a news heading on some website like WFMZ, I just want to see the facts and be able to form my own opinion, not have to be told what to think. Today, with the prevalence of media in our lives, we usually act like sheep and let the news outlets or certain people shape our opinions, with us sometimes changing them from one to another when we go from agreeing with a friend to agreeing with a news network.
Jessica:
Sep 16, 2013 at 07:43 PM
I think there should be lines between what a reporter is reporting and what their opinions on the subject is. If the reporter has a strong opinion on the subject they are reporting, it is going to come out when they are relaying it to the public. Their own personal bias is going to show through, and their opinion may sway the consumers of the news in the reporters direction of bias.
Misha:
Sep 17, 2013 at 11:46 AM
I agree, yet I feel that many times the reporters are not "allowed" to do legitimate news reporting because their are ordered otherwise from the "top bosses". What I'm trying to say is that the actual reporters are small fishes that get eaten by the sharks.
Jessica:
Sep 16, 2013 at 07:49 PM
Yes, I think news reporters and owners should be held at a higher standard. News stations, in a perfect world, should be able to report the news without any bias towards the topics they are reporting on. But, we do not live in this perfect world. No matter what we do about the news corporations, they will always have bias about what they do and do not report on. Because people who own these companies and do the reporting for the companies, a lot of times, can't see passed their own stand on the issue at hand.
Mark:
Sep 17, 2013 at 08:02 PM
This is true, however, I think it is not only that news corporation executives cannot see past their own opinions, but they know that they have a recurring audience of people who have political biases. By keeping the content one-sided, they will keep attracting the same viewers in order to keep their ratings high.
reina:
Sep 16, 2013 at 08:21 PM
News reporters and Corporations should report top stories and news that affect the people in the world. I would rather hear the facts about the campaign election, a murder trial, or a hurricane than news reporter telling me (audience) how he or she feels. Because I would change the channel in a split second if I did not agree with the reporter. I believe they should talk about the facts in an interesting way to catch the audience's attention but not allow their true feelings to get the best of them.
misha:
Sep 17, 2013 at 11:57 AM
Yes, but don't we, as an audience, also want to consume" light hearted" type of news for example what kind of trouble L. Lohan got herself in to this time? There is a market for gossip type of news. People have the need to escape their daily routine, worries etc.
reina:
Sep 17, 2013 at 01:22 PM
I agree that we enjoy listening and watching "light heart" news about celebrities but sooner or later everyone is going to have to face reality. The news is a reality check that lets people know what is really going on in the world, and it is useful to know than other types of news. Who agrees or disagrees with me and why?
Kayla B:
Sep 17, 2013 at 12:21 PM
Isn’t that what news reporters and corporations do, though? They report top news stories. In certain aspects, they have the opportunity to sport their own personal, sometimes biased opinions on the subject. But, most of the time they are still reporting about said election, murder, or hurricane. In the case of politics, which is what a lot of Fox and MSNBC news stations are based around, I believe it’s extremely important for reporters to have opinions. Not to shove these opinions down anyone’s throat, but in case there is a shared opinion with a certain viewer. At the end of the day, it sometimes is all about the highest views and news stations will do all possible to obtain these. With newspapers and other means of news, it’s a lot easier to focus on the major stories without opinions. Last time I picked up the Morning Call, I remember seeing the top news stories right on the front pages, without any biased opinions towards these stories. It wasn’t until I delved deeper into the paper that I read opinionated stories. And you’re right, you can choose to skip these over if you choose to because you don’t believe with what’s been said.
Christina M.:
Sep 16, 2013 at 09:49 PM
This is a really hard question to answer one way or the other. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions and that even includes News corporations. It's our responsibility to react in whichever way we choose. We may choose to lean more towards Fox as opposed to CNN because we agree more with Fox. It's all objective. As great as it would be to just get cold hard facts on the news, that's not the way America operates. We're all about sharing too much information and jamming each other's views down our throats. Plus taking away opinions is sort of taking away the freedom of speech. If we as people are allowed to broadcast our opinions on social media than News corporations have that same privilege.
Misha:
Sep 17, 2013 at 12:37 PM
Yes! So glad you've mentioned it! It is true! This country calls itself to be the "free country" therefore as you say taking away opinions would be equal to taking away freedom of speech. If the sense of freedom gets to be taken away it would jeopardize the image of America.
Christina M.:
Sep 16, 2013 at 10:00 PM
Reading through these other posts, I think it is important to point out that most of us agree that the viewers hold the responsibility of what they decide to truly believe when it comes to bias in the news. Can't we all just take in the information with a grain of salt? We all are aware that corporations try to give us that shock factor and carefully pick their top stories. If we are aware of the strategy behind the news, can't we just intake that information knowing the motive behind it?
I think it's important to receive your news from
various sources so that you're receiving different opinions or even different "facts". I think it's smart to cover all your bases and not take all your news information from one source. Otherwise you're at risk of losing your own opinion and just consuming what they tell you is right.
Misha:
Sep 17, 2013 at 12:10 PM
I agree with Christina. Yes, indeed we have the responsibility to "cover all our bases" when consuming news. I feel we need to play these little detectives and discover what is the unbiased form of news. Here in America we are surrounded by so many choices of how the news gets delivered to us. I'm afraid, sometimes out of convenience and laziness we are choosing biased type of news.
reina:
Sep 17, 2013 at 01:34 PM
I truly agree with you. A person who only gets their news from one source than he or she is limiting themselves. They are not checking if the information they are getting is accurate because they are not listening or watching other news sources.
Jose M:
Sep 17, 2013 at 10:05 AM
Absolutely, they should strives to maintain the highest standard of journalistic ethics. They should exercise mature professional judgment and use guidelines intended to shield the integrity of journalism.
Mark:
Sep 17, 2013 at 09:00 PM
I agree with what you are saying, however, there is a flaw in this idea. If all the news corporations were to produce unbiased material, they would all would be reporting the same news in the same way, thus reducing the need for competition. Therefore one news station would begin to monopolize the news and would be able to completely control what news was released to the public.
Jose M.:
Sep 17, 2013 at 10:27 AM
News corporations should avoid behavior or activities that create a conflict of interest and compromise their ability to report the news fairly and accurately, uninfluenced by any person or action.
Imad Taylor:
Sep 17, 2013 at 12:14 PM
I believe that the news should have their own opinion, but the fact of the matter it is, it just will not happen. We live in a money-hungry country, where making money is more important than news of substance. I feel as if the news corporation have their own opinion, but their employees, who are working among it are limited to what they can and cannot say. I feel as if the writers have to write under the guidelines of the corporation rather than being open and free of how they feel about a certain topic.
Mark:
Sep 17, 2013 at 09:04 PM
I agree, I feel like there is a lot of news that is not reported because it either does not agree with a certain political view, or it is not controversial enough, no matter how pertinent it is.
reina:
Sep 18, 2013 at 10:25 AM
I disagree because the news reporters are hired to report the news with facts rather than opinionate on what they agree or disagree. If they have a strong opinion about something than they can post a comment on twitter, facebook, or blogs. Also, news reporters have a purpose and that is to report the news the way their corporations tell them to.
DeMarquis:
Sep 19, 2013 at 04:46 PM
This is very true however by you saying that we will NEVER live in a world not controlled by money you're automatically submitting your free will as a person who has a voice in this world. As people we should perpetually have the right to introduce to our media whatever it is that we want & half of us don't even know where the media is coming from in which we consume but we wholeheartedly take it to be the truth when it can potentially be pure opinion, non factual and otherwise BRAINWASHING. As a start to change this in society, it would be wise if we first understood who were even listening to, where its coming from and does the man reading off of the teleprompter have any say in what hes actually saying? If not its kind of like taking a blind mans word for it that the grass is orange. Know who youre listening to
Ed:
Sep 17, 2013 at 04:58 PM
I really do want to believe that the News corp should be able to state their opinion...as long as they get their facts straight first. Heck some of their facts have come up wrong. One that comes to mind is the horrible Sandy Hook tragedy. CNN (I believe) wanted to be the first to get the information out to the world that they named the wrong suspect in the shooting. I can't imagine what was going through this persons head, granted he was a relation of the suspect, but can you imagine the looks he was getting when he was on his home from school that day? The News networks are so quick to be the first with "exclusive" info that they just send it through the airwaves. After that mishap I hope they are better in checking their facts before stating their opinions.
Mark:
Sep 17, 2013 at 08:44 PM
In relation to this, another detail the news reported that was incorrect about the Sandy Hook shooting was that the firearm used was an assault rife, later found in the killer's car. This shows that news programs are also eager to report news that is considered controversial, even if it means twisting the truth in order to create a more exciting story.
Jacob B.:
Sep 17, 2013 at 10:21 PM
Poor guy. That really must have sucked! I can only imagine having my name in the news for doing anything illegal that I didn't actually do. Even if it wasn't true, that stuff tends to stick with you. But other than that, I think that opinions and news should be completely separate. People should be able to watch the news and get the facts, not their opinions. If they wanted to hear about someones opinions, i'm sure they would watch a show that is all about opinions and view points.
Roman:
Sep 18, 2013 at 02:15 PM
What do you think of latest shooting and how CNN covered it? They were scrambling for any information before any was released. They had nothing to report on and nothing was happening around them. So, they literally made theories about who, what and why this was happening. They were making it up.
Ed:
Sep 18, 2013 at 04:54 PM
I don't like it when they do that. Why couldn't they simply say "Possible shooting, stick around for more details as they come in" Why scramble for "possibly" wrong information just to get it out there.
Luis Bardales Jr.:
Sep 17, 2013 at 07:35 PM
The world isn't a perfect place and even if we still tried to hold High Standards there will still be people putting their opinion. We just have to learn how to intake the right information and learn how to distinguish fact from opinion. We also have to learn how to distinguish which news is affects us the most and is there a possibility that we can take action. If we don't have the power to take action on a certain situation or it doesn't affect us at all then why should we care about it. The entertainment business will send out certain stories just to capture a buzz and audience when they catch the president or a celebrity doing something wrong but how relevant or personal is that to you? That is the question we should be asking before in-taking unnecessary information.
DeMarquis:
Sep 19, 2013 at 04:53 PM
I completely agree & media should NOT have the right to be publicly destroying people by making them look bad in certain articles when that information can be COMPLETELY false, I mean what even gives us satisfaction to read things like that? Most likely it makes us feel content with the life we live if we say they're doing that bad..
Nathan-Micheal A.:
Sep 17, 2013 at 08:00 PM
We can and likely always will continue to hold news reporters to a higher standard of impartiality than we would your average blogger, but that doesn't necessarily mean that said standards will be adhered to.
There's always been a somewhat unrealistic expectation of total neutrality from the news. This is a problem, because a fair chunk of news topics are simply impossible to report on neutrally, and a larger chunk are still very difficult to report on neutrally.
We can take global warming as an example topic. It is at its heart a scientific issue, but it's been politicized to the extent that whether or not one "believes" in global warming can almost always be accurately predicted by where they fall along the political spectrum.
Our own views are reflected in those of major news networks, since they will only air what gets ratings (as is the case for most television stations), if people didn't politicize every issue, it might be more possible for news networks to be neutral, but we do, so it is not. Thus, while we might want news corporations to not have an opinion, they always will.
Mark:
Sep 17, 2013 at 08:11 PM
I think the reason that news corporations keep a strong political opinion is to increase their number of viewers. If they are militant enough about what they have to say, they will not only attract people who agree with them but also people who disagree. This is because people get upset by programs that preach a different message than they agree with, so they end up watching the program so that they can dispute what it is saying.
reina:
Sep 18, 2013 at 09:28 AM
Sometimes when I watch the news and I disagree than I change the channel and not watch. The news does attract people who agree and disagree and that's how they make money.
Ed:
Sep 18, 2013 at 04:52 PM
I would think if anything, they would lose the viewer by stating what could possibly be an unpopular opinion. I know that if I am watching a news broadcast and they say something I don't like, I won't keep watching.
Luis Bardales Jr.:
Sep 19, 2013 at 10:11 AM
I agree, I want to add on that it is likely they would support the side that the people most support. It also depends on the owner of the show and his views because he is the boss.
Mark:
Sep 17, 2013 at 08:19 PM
I think the reason that news programs should not be biased in their message is that when one program reports the adamantly liberal news and another one the adamant conservative side, no one reports the news for moderate people. News corporations get so caught up in political controversy and selling their viewpoints that news that has no political significance is not reported. Also, stories the oppose both sides are considered "un-American" by all the major news networks, therefore the only story the public gets has an extreme negative spin on it.
Jacob B.:
Sep 17, 2013 at 10:12 PM
Anyone should have the right to state their opinions or views on a certain subject. With that said others should not have to listen to that persons opinions. That is why separating the news and facts from the opinions would be an ideal way of giving the viewer or listener what they want. Not everyone wants to hear a reporters opinion on something that just happened. People watch the news to get the facts about what is happening in the world and they also watch opinionated shows to see what another persons view on a subject is. Lets keep 'em separated.
Ed:
Sep 18, 2013 at 04:58 PM
I completely agree with this. When I turn on the "News" I want to get the news. Not how the news reporter feels about the situation going on. If I wanted to watch a show about peoples opinions on a specific topic, there are plenty of other shows that encourage that.
reina:
Sep 18, 2013 at 10:09 AM
News reporters and corporations should be held to higher standards and report unbiased news, but in reality the news is at times biased. It can be biased because it depends on a certain reporter. I personally don't like listening to biased news but it still occurs. Also, there are different types of news like E! and CNN, and some news is more biased than others. The news we get today are just like the newspaper mass media we acquired years ago. For an example, commercial press, partisan press, and penny press are forms of news that are on TV and internet today. It's more visual and spoken language rather than written news.
Andre:
Sep 18, 2013 at 03:49 PM
news reporters should have there own opinion in their report I know if I hear a news reporter give his or her opinion in a report it makes it more believable/understandable/interesting to know what are the thoughts of someone else
Ed:
Sep 18, 2013 at 04:49 PM
The issue I have with this, is that here are many biased news articles out there and some people will take the news casters opinion on the topic without thinking for their own.
Andre:
Sep 18, 2013 at 04:12 PM
some people are saying they rather have the news say facts or why not go to a show where they show opinions and view points as I said before the news should be entitled to say their opinions not only on Facebook or twitter or any other social media for that matter if they have their opinions let them say it at the end of the report after they give us the facts its simple as that
Morgan:
Sep 19, 2013 at 01:05 AM
In reference to Chapter 4, the news today reminds me of the 'Committee on Public Information'. They talk about how it was the job of the people in this committee to have control over the Americans perception of WWI. I feel like that is how all news channels/our government acts today. We only know what the news channels want us to know and they only know what the government wants them to know. This is exactly why no one seems to 100% know what is going on with the US and Syria. Even if the news reporters keep their opinions to themselves, our news will always be American bias. We're only going to know the American view of the recent news. I'm sure if we would ask someone who lives in Syria under their government, they woud have a totally different story than what we know.
Luis Bardales Jr.:
Sep 19, 2013 at 02:57 PM
Totally agree especially with photography because in WWII photographers would specifically take pictures that would make Americans look good and avoided taking pictures of Americans torturing others.
DeMarquis:
Sep 19, 2013 at 04:58 PM
It is my belief that higher media officials should DEFINITELY be limited to the amounts of opinions in which become mixed in the poor attempt to deliver us news. As it states, news is simply the RELAYING of information... Thats it, so I believe that there should be networks with ABSOLUTE facts and no attempts to sway the opinion of the viewer or deliver absolute propaganda. No more bits and pieces of the truth or half truth and a little uncertainty, just the absolute truth in which can be proven by scientific or eye witnessing facts
Chad C:
Sep 19, 2013 at 04:59 PM
I do believe reporters should be less about their opinion and more about the facts and situation at hand.
Kevin Fluharty:
Sep 19, 2013 at 05:59 PM
While people who are in any business are there to make money to support how they live, they also need to fulfill the function of what they do. News reporters should be encouraged to present the news as it is, and if they want to have discussions, then that's what the talk shows, forums, and message boards are for. The problem is that the various forms of media have begun to blend together to where news reporters think that they should tell everybody what they think about a certain event, even when they're supposed to be telling the unbiased truth. I think that everyone has the right to give their own opinion, just leave it for less professional venues.
Add a Comment