People on the right have been complaining for quite some time about a “left-wing bias in the mainstream media”. People on the left have similarly complained about “how terribly biased Fox News and other right-wing outlets are.”
They are both right, of course.
It’s important to realize that all “news” is biased. It has to be. There never was any such thing as an “objective” news outlet. It’s literally impossible.
Every producer of a news article or video segment is forced to select what things to tell you or show you. Every choice, to show or exclude, is an editorial choice. The writer or producer must choose what things they are going to reveal to you.
That editing constructs a narrative, even if they add no commentary on top of it. But of course, they all do add commentary on top of it. And lately, the bias in the narrative has been appallingly blatant. Here’s one example:
After looking at how CBS News presents these two (literal) stories, do you feel comfortable describing them as a news outlet? Or is it something else? Something more like a propaganda machine?
Consider this bit of wisdom pointed out by the heroic Glenn Greenwald:
He’s right, of course. The group of operators that call themselves the “news media” flipped the literal script on Kamala Harris overnight. She went from cackling embarrassment to heroic savior in an instant — because that’s what the people calling the shots demanded of them.
Here’s the other half of the story that Time magazine’s shot-callers want them to convey to their readers. Is this “news”? I think not. This is a group of people trying to assign an opinion to as many people as they can reach.
Again, it’s more than just a little “bias”. This is propaganda.
It’s important to always keep in mind how deep and pernicious this problem is. It’s not that we just have a little lack of impartiality in the “news”. It’s that these narratives are carefully constructed by powerful people with specific agendas.
As an aside, even though I heartily endorse following Glenn Greenwald and considering what he writes and says, always realize that even he is giving you a narrative. His narrative. He has biases and is trying to persuade you of something too.
So am I.
But there is something to be said for honesty. Greenwald, in my opinion, is honest. Try at least to listen (or give more credence to) people you feel aren’t lying to you. Then consider many sources. Consider how much weight to give each source. Try to triangulate towards something that could maybe be the truth.
And always be skeptical. Never turn off your own brain and just swallow somebody else’s narrative.
Even mine.
Naturally,
Adam
PS: Follow me on Twitter(X): @rerazer
Back when I was a cable cowboy one of my tasks was helping out the people who ran the public, educational and government (PEG) access channels. These were community and government run programming, paid for through subscriber fees that provided local programming for the community. The core of the programming was municipal board meetings and the like. I knew one of the producers fairly well, because she didn't have an engineer and there were many issues with the equipment. One day we got to talking and I called her a journalist, only partially because I was trying to flatter her. I told her that in the age of unlimited bandwidth and storage, there's no reason to ever edit anything other than to put your editorial spin on the topic covered. By covering meetings gavel to gavel, uninterrupted, she was really about the closest thing to unbiased journalism in the city.
FWIW, I'd say the same thing about CSPAN. Problem is, there's no way anyone can consume that much television and still have a life, so for now edited summaries will be necessary. But I'm fairly sure AI content generators will be able to provide a decent summary, complete with as much bias as you wish in the coming years. Now amplify that to every web cam, traffic cam, dash cam, body cam, and doorbell cam, all being accessible to your own AI agent, crawling all that footage all the time. Hurricane blowing in to Miami? Want to see it? No need to send Jim Cantore to describe the wind, we can figure it out thanks. Riots? Citizen journalists upload hours of footage to YouTube now, just need a good way to index, compile and summarize it. That's what computers do really well anyway.
I was once a volunteer reading textbooks onto tape for blind students, and I was assigned a chapter from a journalism text. It was all about expressing your story in terms of stereotypes your reader can quickly understand. :face-palm: