The Audience's Responsibility to Demand Unbiased Reporting

I think that by now everyone is aware that the media is biased.  Fact checks are also biased.  People are biased.  So, what can we do?

First, both audience and the news media must clearly distinguish between reporting and opinion writing.  Opinion pieces and editorials by their very nature include the author’s characterizations about facts as well as the author’s judgments and positions on those facts and the issues to which they are connected.  But editorializing should not be part of reporting the factual news. 

Thomas Jefferson stated, "If we are to guard against ignorance and remain free, it is the responsibility of every American to be informed."  We know that the news media is biased, but that does not leave us, the audience, off the hook.  We must try hard not to fall into the trap of complacency and acceptance of biased news.  This means that we need to be vigilant about the subtle editorializing that goes on in the media:  the tone of voice of a reporter when he or she talks to or about a democrat or republican; the use of adjectives that present a partisan view of the news being written or read.  We need to read or listen to media that has a political view that is different from our own, for in listening to biased reporting from several viewpoints we will likely be able to come to a better understanding of what facts are simply facts and what facts have been presented or omitted or characterized in a way that supports the reporter’s bias. 

We must realize that when the news media editorializes about the facts it is reporting it becomes less effective both in reporting the news and in making its editorial point.  The more obvious is the bias of the news reporter (and it is pretty obvious these days), the less credibility the reporter has.  That is, if the reporter’s position on an issue is clear to the audience, then the audience must wonder whether the reporter is fairly or fully presenting any of the facts rather than simply presenting those that support the reporter’s point of view.  The audience should have far less trust for the reporter.  This is true, even if the reporter’s view matches that of the audience, because, being aware of the bias the audience must understand that the reporter’s view will color all the presentations – those with which the audience agrees and those with which it does not.  We should not want such a reporter when we are seeking factual news and not opinion or feel good confirmation of our own opinions.  The audience can trust its own opinions more fully knowing that they are based on a full presentation of all the facts.

We must also see that reporters who feel the need to present their judgments about facts are in a way belittling their audience.  They are assuming that the audience cannot process the information, understand the significance of the facts, and arrive at its own conclusions about those facts.  Perhaps the audience will reach the same conclusion or point of view as has the reporter, but if the audience reaches that result on its own, its conviction of the correctness of the position will likely be much stronger:  the audience members will have their own decision which they have arrived at through their own analysis of the facts and they own that decision rather than it simply being someone else’s view point.

But, in order for people to arrive at their own conclusions about the facts, they must be given the facts objectively, fully, and fairly.  For example, instead of reporting on the president's “tumultuous week” or his “chaotic week” the press could and should drop these or any editorializing adjectives and simply tell us “here is what the president did this week,” leaving it to the audience to make its own judgment about the significance of those activities.  The adjectives reflect the reporter's view and subtly present that view to the audience as if it were fact.  If given just the facts, perhaps the audience would also conclude they could be characterized as "tumultuous" or "chaotic," but perhaps the audience would simply see those facts as "busy" or "hectic" or "purposeful" or maybe "insane."  The key is that the news should simply give the audience the facts, allowing the audience to arrive at its own judgments and conclusions about those facts. 

Biased presentation of news is wrong and it hampers the right of the people to be well informed.  Jefferson correctly told us that a well-informed electorate is essential to democracy.  But if we are content with the biased or incomplete news reporting that currently exists, then it is likely to continue and we will remain uninformed.  I hope and pray that everyone will begin to vigorously use their minds instead of just hearing and accepting the propaganda of their chosen ideologue.  To do so is essential for the well-being of our democracy.