AN EXAMPLE OF MEDIA BIAS

This morning we have a textbook example of media bias. Here are the headlines and first paragraphs from the New York Times and the Washington Times about the Iraqi election results. Both stories are based on the same set of facts, the hard numbers concerning turnout and yes or no votes, and the same statements from Iraqi officials.

The New York Times:

Iraqi Officials Declare Charter Has Been Passed

By EDWARD WONG
Published: October 26, 2005

BAGHDAD, Iraq, Oct. 25 - Iraqi electoral officials officially announced Tuesday that voters had passed a new constitution, paving the way for parliamentary elections in December. But the constitution narrowly escaped defeat, as Sunni Arabs turned out in large numbers to vote against it.

The Washington Times:

Iraq voters approve new constitution

By Sharon Behn
October 26, 2005

BAGHDAD -- Final referendum results show Iraqis emphatically approved a new constitution, putting their country on a firm democratic footing and setting the stage for crucial legislative elections in just seven weeks, officials said yesterday.

Notice the differences. The Liberal, anti-war paper says in its headline that Iraqi officials SAY the charter has passed. Perhaps those lying officials rigged the vote, eh? The Conservative, pro-war paper says Iraqi VOTERS approved the constitution. Those brave, pro-democracy Iraqis had their say and voted yes. In the first paragraph, the Liberal, anti-war paper says the constitution almost went down to defeat because the Sunnis were against it, while the Conservative, pro-war paper says Iraqi voters EMPHATICALLY approved the document.

Both papers have the facts absolutely correct. We only know the vote passed because Iraqi officials said it did, but all the independent observers saw lots of Iraqis voting and there is a good, plausible reason why some places had over 90% yes votes and other places over 90% no votes. The Sunnis did overwhelmingly vote against the constitution, and if there had been enough no votes in one province the document would have been defeated. But, if you combine the total voting population, then the voters as a whole did overwhelmingly approve of the constitution.

Read both articles in their entirety. They tell the same story with the same facts, but with a clear difference in EMPHASIS. That is the key to understanding real bias in the media. It is about the FOCUS of your story, not the facts. How, then, do you filter out the bias? You need to take the time to read multiple accounts of any story you are interested in, whether it is the Iraq War or the Valerie Plame affair or the Miers nomination. You need to figure out the perspective of the writers and editors (if you can). You need to compare the facts (as some will be included, and others left out).

Because this is such a laborious process, most Americans don't have the time or the inclination to do it. Fortunately, the proliferation of new media outlets, like the Internet and Talk Radio, which are currently dominated by a Conservative worldview, is now effectively countering the MSM, which is dominated by a Liberal worldview (except for papers like the Washington Times). Unfortunately, primarily because of time constraints, most Americans are simply relying on the media outlets they feel comfortable with so, increasingly, they are getting only one side of the story. The polarization of the American body politic continues.