Media bias damages news credibility

Most reporters and others involved with the production of the mass media will swear their job is to share information with the masses and to tell the truth.

However, is it possible for the mass media to share information without bias?

Can people really trust the information they obtain from it to make important decisions?

Here in North Carolina, it was hard to avoid Elizabeth Dole's political attack advertising during the last election.

She repeatedly aired an ad that said her opponent, Kay Hagan, accepted funds from "a leader of the Godless Americans PAC," and implied that she was an atheist as well.

Dole's advertisements were blatantly untrue and were obviously directed at the most uninformed people in North Carolina.

In fact, Hagan is a Sunday school teacher and the fundraising event that the ad referenced was completely unrelated to the Godless Americans cause.

Luckily, the people of North Carolina sent a message that these lies would not sway them when they elected Hagan on Nov. 4.

But what if an advertisement comes along that is not so blatant in its untruths, or a candidate does not tell the truth in an interview or debate?

How can the public make an informed political decision when they do not know if they are basing that decision on accurate information?

Many people would answer that the public should turn to the mass media for accurate information. But how can people be sure they can trust the information they hear on the news?

Remember, only a few years ago, the Bush administration managed to convince the mass media there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

Even after it became clear there were no such weapons, some loyal media outlets reported that the weapons were probably moved before the military found them.

The fact is, people produce the media, and people cannot help but have an opinion.

All a person or group has to do is convince a majority of the news outlets of their side of an issue, and the next day that issue is front-page news.

Even if a reporter is trying to give an accurate depiction of both sides of an argument, there is always an inherent bias just because the reporter chooses whom to interview, where to gather information and which quotes to publish.

So, what is an inquiring citizen to do? Do not just listen to one media outlet.

Many would argue Fox News and MSNBC are biased on opposite sides of every issue, so citizens should listen to both and every news outlet in between.

The only way to be sure to gain an accurate depiction of news events is to gather a majority of the available information and make a decision based on the collective results.

No one is going to learn anything new by watching CNN cover the same story for the fifth time.

The only way to learn anything is to hear what the other media outlets have to say.

This, of course, is not to say anyone should let an opposing viewpoint alter their deeply held opinions. But, how can anyone really argue their position on a topic without knowing the other side?

So, to all the loyal MSNBC fans at UNC Asheville, turn on FOX News, CNN or pick up a paper once in awhile.

You might be surprised what you can learn from the other side.

The truth is out there somewhere; it just takes some effort to find it.

Courtney Metz is a senior mass communication and management student at UNCA.

Be the first to comment on this article!

Add comment


I am not posting spam. I understand posting spam or other comments that are unrelated to this article will cause my comment to be flagged for deletion and possibly cause my IP address to be permanently banned from this server.

Enter the characters in the image above:

log out