Political Bias in the Media

Political Bias in the Media

Because mass media is a dominant source of information for the public, it is important that the information presented by mass media be dependable. Moreover, the information should be presented with integrity, and be devoid of political or personal bias. Mass media should be objective to allow the consumer to formulate his or her own opinions based on the facts contained within the media source. For all these standards and expectations is it conceivable to have mass media completely unbiased and objective?

The topic of the British Petroleum debacle in the gulf has been a major focus in the media. In late April 2010, the Deepwater Horizon, a deep sea oil rig leased by British Petroleum (BP) exploded, killing 11 rig workers (Welch & Joyner, 2010). Since that time oil has been leaking into the ocean, covering the surface waters, and carried by the currents into the marshlands of Louisiana and other coastal states. Louisiana relies heavily on its fishing and shrimping industry. Many local workers and company spokespersons have expressed concern on the damage the spill has done to the ecosystem upon which they rely for financial stability.

In an effort to combat the spill, BP used an estimated 1.8 million gallons of chemicals designed to disperse, and break down the oil slick adding additional concern to the communities on whether or not the chemicals could be found in the various plants and animals sold for food by the Louisiana companies (Charles, 2010). The question lingers on, “is the food safe for human consumption?” Many articles address these concerns with a surprising amount of variance in information.

In the article Louisiana Fisherman Slam Claims the Oil Almost Gone, Seafood Safe, written by Jacoba Charles, a correspondent for the SolveClimate news agency, many Louisiana residents express fear, and as the title suggests, are reluctant to believe reports by federal agencies such as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that the oil is nearly gone, and the food supplies are safe for consumption. The author of the article does not express any opinion regarding the state of the oil spill or its effect on the coastal state, but instead focuses on the opinions of the local communities that paint a picture more grim than that of other articles pertaining to the same event (Charles, 2010). The stated mission of the SolveClimate agency is to educate the reader about events that either cause harm or improve the ecological state of the world. In this mission, the company does carry a certain political agenda.

Conversely, in the article written for the Associated Press (AP) by Cain Burdeau and Jeffrey Collins, the attitude is more positive. The title of the article best represents its tone: In La., signs of regrowth seen in oiled marshes. The authors cited a local ecologist as stating that, based on what he has seen in the marshlands the impact to local fisheries would not be a significant issue. In addition, the authors cited a local crab fisherman who stated that he had not seen any oil or residue on the crabs and fish he caught, which he punctuated by saying “We're going to have us a crab boil” (Burdeau & Collins, 2010). The Associated Press has long been an organization that has portrayed information in an objective and unbiased fashion, and this article is no exception.

The Reuters article FDA: Oil Dispersants Won't Foul Seafood supports the same assertion in the AP article that the chemicals used by BP to combat the oil spill will not harm those who consume seafood and other products from that region. As in the AP article, this article outlines the FDA's position on the chemical dispersants in a way that is informative and objective. The article acknowledges opposing viewpoints but does an excellent job of providing credible sources to support its claims (Reuters, 2010).

The central theme of the articles revolve around the FDA and the Coastal Seafood industry’s recent affirmation that the oil spill clean-up is under control, and contamination of the chemical dispersant to humans is nonexistent. Although most of the articles analyzed seemed to be neutral in their reporting by addressing only facts along with arguments; nevertheless, the attitude of one particular article had a different tone.

Jacoba Charles goes beyond just reporting facts. By focusing on many local voices of opposition to the claims by the FDA, Charles represents the attitudes of the local coastal Louisiana fisherman living daily with the disastrous oil spill. They claim the oil is far from gone as suggested by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Many are concerned that the dispersant will eventually come to surface, and that BP’s solution is perhaps only temporary. The tone in this article is to bring a voice to those locals who are skeptical about the FDA’s reporting that the seafood lacks contaminates along with the government and media’s portrayal that the clean-up is under control.

As the NOAA has stated the oil is 75% gone, and that there is significant growth seen in the marsh where the cataclysmic oil spill has spread. Despite these claims there is skepticism and contrary evidence being presented. Although the Associated Press is reporting a significant improvement, there are anglers who say the opposite is true. While there are reports coming forth that the seafood is not negatively affected and the oil or chemical dispersant has not hurt the seafood, there are fishermen in the Louisiana area reporting the opposite (Burdeau & Collins, 2010).

Charles (2010) found the following:

In the small towns of coastal Louisiana, the widespread consensus is that the oil is far from gone. Fishermen return from working on cleanup crews or from recreational angling trips with stories of crabs whose lungs are black with oil, or of oysters with shells covered in sludge. They take photos and carry tarballs home like talismans to show what they have seen. They talk about their fears with anyone who will listen, and often their voices are tinged with panic.

Dawn Nunez is a store-owner in the oil soaked Louisiana region. She is concerned about eating the seafood and will not feed it to her children. She and her husband, who has worked with oil his whole life, are both confident the oil is still in the environment contrary to other reports saying it is mostly gone. They have seen the oil on marsh grass and seafood (Charles, 2010).

Brian Zito (2010), a commercial fisherman on Grand Isle stated:

I've been working with oil all my life. Dispersant is like soap, and if you wash your hands in a bucket your water will be all white and soapy and fine. But let that bucket sit there for a few hours and see what happens – all that oil is going to come back together.

When it comes to mass media in today’s world it is always best to check different sources when certain news break. A variety of media sources is needed to obtain more than a single viewpoint. Many times the stories one sees on CNN will not be aired on Fox news and vice versa. Another reason to check different media is that each media source either covers different stories or both cover the same story from a different viewpoint. One could argue that no network is perfect. Despite their best efforts, all mass media sources have at least some level of bias, which is why it is the responsibility of the consumer to separate fact from opinion.

In today’s world journalism has changed. Sometimes it seems as though there are more opinions floating around than facts. For example, when the BP spill occurred everyone had opinions on what to do and what they thought of the situation. In many cases it appeared organizations were merely tossing around criticism assuming the spill would be an easy task to undertake. Fox news criticized President Obama. MSNBC showed President Obama as doing his best. Many local news stations focused more on the factual information relating to the state of the oil spill. CNN did well to focus on the BP spill and avoid many of the politics altogether.

Another informative media source is the Internet. One has access to a broad range of media while also being able to read other viewers' opinions in addition to posting one's own views. The Internet is a diverse media source. Within it exists news websites, blogs, online newspapers, magazines, and more. Any given story can be posted in its entirety online. One must use caution online concerning blogs as some blogs tend to take news out of context. This can lead to unnecessary controversy and misinformation spreading throughout the Internet. It does not matter which single media source one uses. It is perhaps best to use multiple sources to obtain multiple viewpoints. One can then form one's own opinion based on the facts presented in each source.

Political bias is something that has occurred through the years. Today, most news networks will say they are fair and balanced although in some cases these same networks are biased toward a certain political party. This biased attitude exists not just on television, but also on the Internet, the newspaper, and on the radio. As long as consumers accept this behavior political bias will continue to influence the media. Still, many agencies pride themselves on reporting information in an unbiased fashion. Increasing one's media literacy, and one's ability to determine fact among fiction will aid in making sense of the tidal wave of information that today's average consumer is exposed to on a daily basis.

References

Burdeau, C., & Collins, J. (2010). In La., signs of regrowth seen in oiled marshes. Associated Press. Retrieved August 14, 2010 from http://hosted.ap.org

Charles, J. (2010). Louisiana fisherman slam claims the oil almost gone, seafood safe. SolveClimate. Retrieved August 14, 2010 from http://solveclimate.com

Reuters. (2010). FDA: Oil dispersants won't foul seafood. Retrieved August 14, 2010 from http://www.newsmaxhealth.com

Welch, W. M., & Joyner, C. (2010). Memorial service honors 11 dead oil rig workers. USA Today. Retrieved August 14, 2010 from www.usatoday.com