Political Agenda
Media has come up to be of considerable help to world communication today.
With the improving technology, media also has not been left out. Media coverage as well as reporting and conveying of information from one point to the other is now easier. Cable news has made its work even easier as information is relayed on the spot since it is a fast method. However, as the media coverage is becoming better, they are also taking advantage of the ease to bring up stories. This brings up some bias to the media.
Identifying biases in an article is difficult because in most cases, bias is based on one’s opinion; however, it reflects some kind of laziness from the reporter and failure to do the proper research. It can also reflect a choice to do so by the reporter depending on the line of thinking and also his opinion on the matter. The work of a reporter is to present a true, balanced story. However, with deadlines to beat and the external pressure, it becomes difficult to be consistent on presenting an exceptionally balanced story. Media is supposed to give equal airtime to all parties in order to present a reasonable basis for argument on any issue.
In most cases, media reporting is biased on one side over the other depending on the media house and the relationship with the parties involved. Biasness can also be by story selection where a media outlet chooses to focus on a story that helps to popularize a certain party as compared to a story that which popularizes their opponent. A blog by Edward Klein on the real reason Obama snubbed Netanyahu, which was published on September 20, 2012, gives an insight into the biasness of the media. In this link, the writer despises President Obama’s domestic policies. He also indicates that the president has a weak record at home with soft diplomacy to the Muslim countries being shattered.
He also despises the way the president dealt with the leaders of Israel and Egypt. The writer as he writes is clearly not impressed by the way the President agreed to meet with Mohammed Morsi, the president of Egypt at a private meeting. He argues that the president ought to have given both leaders an equal and fair chance to meet him. This blog only attacks President Obama and does not give any unpleasant side of Netanyahu who also is publicly saying he does not trust Obama. The writer expressly feels that the President does not want to be lectured publicly. He also expresses his views on why Netanyahu is interfering with the presidential elections.
In my opinion, this blog is unfair to the President. (Klein, 2012) Another significant example is a blog by Charles Mahtesian in www.politico.com. On 4th October 2012, this explains it all. The blog titled “Debate Verdict: A Good Night for Romney”.
(Mahtesian, 2012) The blog talks about the first political debate in the US for the upcoming elections. Charles in this article explains the way the first debate was held on the 3rd of October. He states that Romney, a presidential candidate up against president Obama, was blameless in this debate, and that he gained victory over the president on the debate. He also states that with the size of audience following up with the debate gives Romney an advantage over Barack Obama. This article, in my view, is biased on one side. He tends to explain that Romney was extremely courteous over Barack Obama, which might not, be the case.
He also states that Romney might have gained an advantage over Obama in the debate. In my opinion, the facts about the debate have been hyped hence rendering the article biased. The position of the writer tends to lie to the side of one of the presidential candidates which, in this case, is unfair. This piece is exceptionally beneficial in their reporting as it informs people on the debate. However, with the slight bias it makes it lose its perfection.
