The K Experience

UK vs USA - Media and Politics
Present - News
Saturday, 05 July 2008

mediabias.jpg

So it's the BBC Vs Fox, is that a fair comparison? Should it be the BBC vs CNN or ITV instead of the BBC? Doesn't really matter to be honest. The style of reporting between the US networks is not really that different in my opinion. What I've seen in the last year or so living in the US is not really impressive. I would never see Jeremy Paxman or Trevor McDonald carrying on like that...

I must say that I was never really interested in politics, and actually did my best to stay away from all things political up until I went to Ghana in 2004. There, I was fortunate enough to witness the re-election of President John Agyekum Kufuor, the second democratically elected president (some would argue the first fairly elected), and the one who took power from Jerry John Rawlings who led 3 military coups and ran for 20 odd years. This was a momentous, and historic occasion, which marked a continuation of the peaceful political state in Ghana that Kufuor had instilled over the last four years, a change from the previous years of instability and fear which reigned in the country under Rawlings. Needless to say, the atmosphere that was created in the country from the very politically aware public rubbed off on me (if I recall correctly, over 80% of those eligible to vote actually did).

I carried my new found interest in politics back to the UK with me, and payed more attention to what Tony Blair and his cronies were up to. At this stage Gordan Brown was huffing and puffing over the fact that Tony hadn't stood down as Prime Minister as he promised to do, but that's another story. Even so, UK politics was still pretty boring, and could only catch a little of my attention. I hadn't begun to be really critical of Western politics until I moved to the US, where I witnessed the media frenzy first over Hillary and Obama, and now between Obama and McCain, and I must say I have noticed a lot of very disturbing differences between UK and US media coverage of political issues.

I first wrote on this topic in my article about the whole Jeremiah Wright situation which occurred in April. It was here that I noticed the extreme political bias that existed in the mainstream media in the US, FOX news being the main culprit. Since then I have payed more attention to news broadcasts and their "interpretation" of the news. Before I continue I should say that my observations are mainly of televised news broadcasts, and not print media, as the only print media I read in the US is the LA Times, when I have the time, which is not often. Thus I am by no means an authority on political news in any way, but merely want to express my opinion.

In the UK I never really noticed any noticeable political bias in TV news broadcasts. To my knowledge view points would be pretty well balanced between the two main political parties, Labour and Conservatives, and every now and then you would hear the views of the Liberal Democrats, (Sadly, after the death of Screaming Lord Sutch , the Monster Raving Loony Party have not had much of a voice). The only major debates between politicians and the media have the presenter pretty much grilling the politicians most of the time, very rarely taking sides. If there is any collusion between the media and politics, it's not obvious through news broadcasts.

This does not seem to be the case in the US, as it seems pretty clear that some of the news corporations take sides, or at least take on view points in favor of some politicians over others, which clearly shows a conflict of interests. In my opinion presenters should present the facts, unbiased, clear, understandable facts, and let the public decide what to think and believe. However, what they did with Jeremiah Wrights words, and the following example of General Wesley Clark shows not only bias, but taking people out of context, and quoting them inaccurately. The following is a clip of General Wesley Clark talking about John McCain's Military record, which is followed by "interpretations" of Wesley's words by CNN, Fox and other network presenters. Is this what news broadcasts should be like?

 

Swift-boating, the word chosen to describe Clark's comments is clearly not accurate. Was he really "dissing" McCain's military record? To me he was just putting it into perspective. However, it seemed like the media wanted to milk the statements a bit to get the most out of them. The lady in the video (I don't know her name) clearly got worked up over something which in my opinion was quite irrelevant.

"Wait a second, we are talking about a MAAAAN who was essentially in a HOOOLE, having chairs broken over his shoulders for five and a half years..."

 To see the wider context of General Clark's comments, watch the next video...

If we totally ignore the "Barack Obama is more ready to be president than...Barack Obama" slip up, which I missed the first few times I watched it, the rest goes on for a while, and you don't really need to hear the whole thing to get it.

To my knowledge this kind of reporting wouldn't happen in the UK. Not to say that the BBC haven't shown bias in the past on some issues (coverage of Africa, the Middle East and Asia for example, something I wish to discuss in another article) but it just seems quite childish and petty for professional newscasters to be carrying on in this manner.

I did a bit of digging (somewhat superficial, I admit) about bias in UK media to try and give a fair view. Bias is clearly evident in newspapers, I must admit, but I couldn't find any political bias in TV broadcasts, or any reports of such. I did find reports of the BBC being

"dominated by trendy, Left-leaning liberals who are biased against Christianity and in favour of multiculturalism." Daily Mail 21st October 2006

Other sources state similar things. The Telegraph, stated that:

"The BBC has failed to promote proper debate on major political issues because of the inherent liberal culture of its staff, a report commissioned by the corporation has concluded." Telegraph, 18th June 2007

But then going on to say:

"After a year-long investigation the report, published today, maintains that the corporation’s coverage of day-to-day politics is fair and impartial."

Have there even been studies on the bias or impartiality of US media corporations? Is this not an issue in American society? Am I making a mountain out of a mole hill here? I have already confessed my lack of qualifications in politics, so maybe I am missing something. One thing that I haven't mentioned is that CNN and Fox and the other US news networks are independent whereas the BBC is a national corporation. But if I bring ITV or Channel 4 into the mix, it still wouldn't make much difference.

I was trying to find some examples of UK broadcasts and political interviews, and a great example of an unbiased presenter (in my opinion) is Jeremy Paxman of "Did you threaten to overrule him?" fame (which appears at the end of the video). He seems to treat all politicians the same, and quotes them accurately, not taking them out of context, but taking them to task.

It would be really good to hear other peoples opinions on this. To the Brits out there, do you know of any examples of political bias in news broadcasting? And to the Americans, does this kind of thing go on all the time, and if so, is it not a problem?

[Source: Comic by Nick Dewyn and featured on Quantz.com, other reports of bias in the BBC: BBC, Biased BBC Blogspot]


Other News Views

 

Comments
Add New
+/-+/- Comment Form
Write comment
Name:
Email:
 
Website:
Title:
UBBCode:
[b] [i] [u] [url] [quote] [code] [img] 
 
 
Please input the anti-spam code that you can read in the image.
Ben Owusu |07-12-2008 12:26:10
Wow i.... i cant believe in the first vid that newsreporter effectively shut
down the other guy by telling him that he will never be on the show again.

Man,
i thought i knew the extent of the behavour and attitudes of the american media
and the american people but this takes it to new levels.
Ian |09-30-2008 19:41:14
Actually it happens a lot, and the unfortunate thing is that most of us are
completely used to it.

I remember this kind of thing being a hot topic when I
was in elementary school and apparetly media biases were on the rise. In fact,
in fifth grade our writing class had a discussion on it, if you can believe
that. And then one day it seemed like it disappeared. No one in the media was
talking about it. The thing wasn't that it wasn't incediary, it'd just been
overplayed, it was old hat. I could talk about media bias on the street and
still have a heated discussion but the media itself was reticent because the
thing about the media in America is that it's about the perfect approximation of
a badly behaved child with ADD tearing apart the kitchen in search of a cookie
jar for raiding. It couldn't talk about media bias because it had moved on, and
modern infocasters rarely look back.

I don't think the media was 24 hour
bonanza time quite at that moment but you could kind of feel them gearing up for
something. Reving their engines for the time they'd never turn off. The pundits
were moving from famous to meteoric, opinion was pouring in to fill the gap left
by more time than information and people seemed to love contorversy, Jerry
Springer had proved that with pinache (and a few splintered chairs). Soon, it
just seemed like bias was part of the engine and since so many people seemed to
be being validated, even at the expense of polarization, it worked.

The fact
that news stations in America is significant to this because it gets to the real
issue, that the news is being dispensed to the public as a product not as
information. Everything is processed just as much as McDonalds hamburgers and
with all the same dividends to show. And just like the golden arches that can be
seen everywhere, at some point you just learn to block out the ugliness, like a
coping mechanism.

It's not that people necessarily like it (some do), or that
it's at all right, it's just that the machine is powerful and to some degree
necessary but because it's so huge, and become now so volitile, nobody knows how
to adjust it. And that's the predicament.
K  - re: |10-01-2008 21:04:28
Ian wrote:
the news is being dispensed to the public as a product not as information.


That's Deep!

3.25 Copyright (C) 2007 Alain Georgette / Copyright (C) 2006 Frantisek Hliva. All rights reserved."


Digg!Reddit!Del.icio.us!Facebook!
 
< Prev   Next >
Home arrow Present arrow News arrow UK vs USA - Media and Politics