Kathrine Nero
The 2024 word of the year was polarization, to the surprise of virtually no one.
To quote Merriam Webster, it’s “the one idea that both sides of the political spectrum agree on.”
Along with sowing discord, violence, and making family get-togethers even more awkward, polarization can also color the way we consume the news.
Someone recently told me they hated when newscasters gave their opinions on stories. I asked for specifics, because journalists are trained to be objective, supplying – even investigating – facts, allowing the consumer to draw their own conclusions.
We concluded that the show to which they were referring was an opinion show, not news.
But it looked like news.
And sounded like news.
And it featured a guy in a suit who looked like a newscaster, talking about politics. So … it must be news.
Except that it wasn’t.
What’s news and what’s opinion?
Those 24-hour news channels on both sides of the aisle can slyly switch from a newscast to an opinion show in the blink of an eye, sometimes without the viewer even noticing. An opinion – or editorial – columnist’s work can be published right alongside the nuts and bolts story about a political candidate or issue.
And there’s absolutely nothing wrong with that.
Opinion reporters, columnists and hosts are actually paid to share their opinions. Their work is not meant to be unbiased, or objective. But it is meant to be labelled as such.
Journalism was rampant with opinion for years, leaning into the sensationalism that sold early papers. But then in 1841, the New York Tribune became the first publication to separate news from opinion writing. At the time, the founder, Horace Greeley, called it the “Editorial Page,” and other papers did the same. These days, you see it in print and digital labelled “opinion,” and on TV, called “commentary.”
The problem is when opinion is delivered as fact.
The Myth of Objectivity
Though the goal of a journalist is to deliver news subjectively, no one is truly free of bias. We have experiences and relationships that color our judgement and perspective.
Here’s a simple example:
A bridge shutdown is tripling commutes for some residents of your town. It’s also creating problems for small businesses in the area because people don’t want to fight the traffic to get there.
Reporter 1 lives north of town and their commute isn’t affected at all. They also don’t know or frequent the businesses having trouble.
Reporter 2 uses that bridge every day, and their usual 15-minute commute is now 45 minutes. Their favorite restaurant is having to lay off servers because business is decreasing.
I’m guessing Reporter 2 would make a fervent plea to do this story. They would have the contacts and the passion for the story that would make it compelling to watch.
Reporter 1 might need convincing that this story was worthwhile, and would likely tell the story with less emotion, focusing more on numbers, commutes and timelines.
Neither is wrong. But Reporter 2’s story, rife with fairly obvious bias, would actually be the better one.
Why transparency matters
And that brings us back to that opinion show my friend was watching, and the one thing that can solve a world of ills when it comes to bias and objectivity: transparency.
Had the network been more transparent about the contents of the program, viewers could decide if they want to listen to opinion or search elsewhere for news.
Media outlets need to be transparent about ownership, sponsored programming, political and financial interests.
True neutrality in journalism may be unattainable, but striving for fairness and transparency remains essential.
It’s on us
Journalism doesn’t exist in a vacuum. It holds. A mirror up to us as a society, reflecting and influencing the community it serves. That means it’s also on us as the consumer to know what we’re reading and watching, and to seek out multiple sources with diverse perspectives to make sure it’s factual and accurate.
By acknowledging and addressing biases, both journalists and audiences can contribute to a media landscape that upholds democratic values while embracing its inherent complexities.
Leave a Reply