Skip to main content

Framing the News

This article, Two Views of the Same News Find Opposite Biases, by Shankar Vedantam was in the Washington Post Online this week. I'm often frustrated by the constant complaining about the "liberal" or "conservative" media. For the record, I think that media consolidation can only harm, that mainstream media is biased, not so much to the left or right (except for, of course, Fox News), but toward the status quo, and that mainstream media depends too much on an episodic, rather than systematic, frame for the stories it cover. But that's not the point of this post. I'm not the first, nor will I be the last to rant about these issues on the web.

This article described a study that showed that partisans on either side of an issue, when shown the exact same media clips, each find bias in favor of the other side. Kind of a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation they call the "hostile media effect." The most interesting part for me:

"...The best-informed partisans were the most likely to see bias against their side... [because they]... often feel the news lacks context. Instead of just showing a missile killing civilians, in other words, partisans on both sides want the news to explain the history of events that prompted -- and could have justified -- the missile. The more knowledgeable people are, the more context they find missing."

I didn't see the conclusions as depressing. Okay, they're depressing, but I finished the article thinking, "Well, this is only knowledge that can help." Yup, I guess I really am ready to dive in. My first day of school is in exactly a month.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

This post was a whole long longer and more emotional an hour ago...

First off: It's sad that I get better wireless reception in my backyard than in my apartment, right? Sigh. I normally try to stay out of the quagmire that is the abortion debate, but as usually, elyzabethe wrote something insightful about feminist issues that I had to comment on. Actually, I had to comment on the framing war that was going on in the comments section between elyzabethe and another friend. Then I ended up emailing back and forth with her for awhile. Then someone at work mentioned how the "choice" frame is starting to lose ground, even though advocates don't want to admit it. I started scribbling notes, sighed, and thought, "well, I'm gonna have to blog about this." Elyzabeth rants often against anti-choice organizations and legislation, as is her wont as a libertarian feminist. She’s particularly good at teasing out how anti-choice (A, if you’re reading this, bear with me, I’m referring to ‘anti-choice’ as more than just the abortion issu...
The City of Milwaukee launched this ad campaign this week (along with Serve Marketing , my new dream employer). My first reaction was that it was a striking and effective ad, but then I realized it was aimed at co-sleeping, not just putting babies to sleep on their backs. I know next to nothing about co-sleeping, but I have a feeling that there are healthy ways to co-sleep, and un-healthy ways to co-sleep. Putting a child in bed on their stomach would be one of those un-healthy ways, but so is putting them on their stomach in their cribs. I don't know that it's necessarily fair to confuse the two issues. Plus, according to the City of Milwaukee's web page , Between 2006 and 2009 there were 89 infant deaths related to SIDS, SUDI, or accidental suffocation.  Of these 46 (51.7%) infants were sleeping in an adult bed at the time of their death.   Meaning that 48.3 percent (or 43 babies) were not co-sleeping, but presumably in their cribs. Although I loathe to say tha...

Less Blogging, More Tweeting

FYI, I haven't been happy with how a lot of my posts are turning out, as well as the frequency with which I'm posting. Since most of the time, I just want to share a link that has an interesting take on telling its story, I'm going to dust off my Twitter account to share those and only post here if I'm really inspired. To the twelve people who read this blog, thanks.