From: bblumenf@ems.cdc.com (Robert Blumenfeld)
Newsgroups: alt.news-media
Subject: Re: Sources of Bias
Date: 26 Aug 92 18:29:40 GMT
Reply-To: bblumenf@ems.cdc.com
Organization: Empros Systems International, a division of CDC

In article <1992Aug26.155816.8882@afit.af.mil>, jswitzer@afit.af.mil (Chip Switzer) writes:
|> maxwell@fnala.fnal.gov writes:
|> 
|> >I keep putting this one off, let's see how it goes ...
|> 
|> >Let's start with the given that the news media is biased.  Furthermore, let's 
|> >jettison the ad infinitum ad nauseum floor-wax/dessert-topping citations.
|> 
|> >What would cause the media to bias its reportage?
|> >The need to stay in business. 
|> 
|> >Media organisms stay in business by selling a product.  People have to buy the
|> >product. Therefore one bias in reportage will be to provide a product that
|> >people are willing to buy.  Since most people don't like challenges to their
|> >world-view, reportage will tend to support the world-view of the people who
|> >consume the reporting.
|> > The logical consequence of repeatedly and profoundly challenging the world-
|> > view of the consumers of a media product will be that the consumers will 
|> > find a product more to their liking. 
|> > Similarly, the media organism will not produce a product hostile to its 
|> > subscriber base.
|> 
|> [rest of theory deleted]
|> >Well, Sirs, what do you think?
|> 
|> It is an interesting discussion and and a fairly well thought out
|> proof(?) of "popular" bias.  There is, howver, one major and in my
|> opinion, fatal flaw in the argument.  The media is not a common
|> commodity.  It should not be compared to, say, what brand of ice cream
|> you like and therfor support with you dollars.  If this were the case,
|> you would be right on and we would most likely see a more balanced 
|> coverage (read: not alienating consumers).  
|> 
|> But, the news media is much more like your local utility than a brand of
|> ice cream.  They are usually a monopoly in a community (even broadcast
|> news is pretty much so...).  And most people *have* to have news.  So,

Yes, just the other day I had a news fit.  Ran screaming down to my
supermarket and just grabbed up everything in sight.  Please don't
generalize.

As to there being only one newspaper (as you apparently meant "news
media" to mean, judging from your side comment about broadcast news)
in a city, judging from trends over the past twenty years, that could 
be because one is the last number before zero. 

By the way, when do you find time to get your work done?

|> you buy what is available and try to make a difference by writing to the
|> editor or you just accept that the bias is there and be sceptical of the
|> information you're getting.  The paper (or whatever) will stay in
|> business even though it may in reality alienate many of its consumers.
|> I am a prime example.  Even though my newspaper regularly insults my
|> intelligence and leans way to the left, I still have a subscription.
|> Your theory works, but in a very limited sense.  I do know people who
|> have cancelled their subscriptions and just rely on news broadcasts.
|> And newpaper and broadcast news consumers are (I think) still on the
|> decline, but won't go away.
|> 
|> 
|> Chip Switzer                            "A witty saying proves nothing." 
|> jswitzer@afit.af.mil                              -- Voltaire 
|> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|> Available: Software Engineer or MIS. MSCE, 1 year C++, Unix Experience
|> 	   Highly motivated, keeps political opinions at home!
|> 	             Seattle area, only.  513-233-4502

-- Bob