From: nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson)
Subject: Re: CNN Anchor Admits Pro-Clinton Bias
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 16:43:27 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Corporation, Chelmsford, MA

In article <1992Sep10.003145.7993@ke4zv.uucp> gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman) writes:
>>
>>  I disagree that objectivity is *possible*.  Reporters, editors, photo-
>>  graphers, etc are human beings with inevitable biases, prejudices, 
>>  and a whole bunch of built-in cultural assumptions. 

>Well it's time someone from the media lent an authoritative word to
>this debate. The media is biased. Individual reporters are biased,
>fewer in the liberal direction than you would think. And corporate
>officers are biased, and dictate that *their* bias be the one represented
>on the air. I've worked in broadcasting for 25 years. I see the raw
>unedited stories. I hear the reporters complain that they aren't allowed
>to tell the truth. I hear the producers quote the party line. I talk
>to anchors who wince when they have to read the scripts that pass for
>reality.

>The news media in this country is basically in the hands of a few
>corporations.  Their editorial policy is what has to be followed
>or you don't work in the business. Such things are unwritten,
>but made quite clear to those who decide what sees daylight, and
>what gets twisted or buried.

  All this seems to confirm what I've been saying.


>In daily news reporting, there are few choices. Most towns now
>have only one paper, and it's owned by one of the megamedia companies.
>Most towns have interchangeable TV news programs who compete to see
>who can use the most special effects in a newscast, content is strictly
>secondary to flash.

  True again, although I would say this:  Local "daily news" really
  isn't that important.  Subtract out all the fires, crimes, sports,
  local celebrity stuff, and the national stuff which is covered 
  better elsewhere, and what you're left with is usually covered
  in any of many weekly publications.  In Boston, with 680,000 people
  for instance, there are two major dailies, the liberal Globe and
  the conservative tabloid Herald.  And there are the usual local
  TV stations.  But there are *dozens* of weekly and monthly news-
  papers and magazines, some with tiny circulations, others with 
  glitzy, glossy upscale markets.  Together these do quite a good
  job covering Boston&vicinity political and social issues, often 
  with unique perspectives not found in the dailies.


> Read or watch a story about an issue of which you
>have personal knowledge. Then note the distortions and spin applied
>to it by the media. Now consider that the same distortions and spin
>are being placed on stories where you have no personal knowledge to
>direct you. It can be frightening.

  Damn straight!   This was probably THE biggest reason I stopped
  trusting TV news.  It is incredible how often CNN, for instance, 
  would screw up basic facts in their stories.  I used to call them
  in Atlanta to point out their errors until I found myself doing so
  on almost every newscast and it was obvious that they didn't
  care.    And as Gary says, most of us are only experts in a
  few small areas.  I shudder when I think of all the stuff they're
  saying that I have no knowledge about and have to just "trust
  them"



>I'd also note that editorial slant is almost never an issue when
>questions about circulation or ratings are discussed. What's
>discussed in those meetings is how to change the *style* of
>the paper or broadcast to increase it's appeal, no voice is
>ever raised to change the slant of the content, that's a given
>that can't be altered.

  I presume this is because they're convinced that this is not a 
  factor for market share/acceptance.  And apparently they're  
  right, at least in the TV market.   Having attended ANPA 
  recently (my wife works in the newspaper industry) it is 
  clear that the newspaper industry is in serious decline, 
  although editorial content probbaly has nothing to do with
  it.

 


>                      The broadcast business is obscenely 
>profitable by the standards of most industries. They know
>they can feed the public nearly anything and get away with
>it.

   The free market -- ya gotta love it!



---peter






Organization: Freshman, H&SS general, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA