28.1.07

AY '06-'07 2nd Sem English10 concept first draft

DE LEON, Juan Gabriel L.
2006-07148
English 10 MHW
Mrs. Anna F. Sanchez
Concept Paper [First Draft]

“The Truth, the Whole Truth and Nothing but the Truth”: The Value of Objectivity in Modern Media

Different sources of media find themselves in bits of conflict every now and then. In recounting the events that happened during the December 15, 2007 Board of Regents meeting regarding the proposed increases in UP’s tuition and miscellaneous fees, the Philippine Daily reported that “[Student regent Raffy Jones] Sanchez, along with faculty regent Roland Simbulan, did not attend the meeting in protest of the sudden change in venue,” thinking that their presence would not hinder the approval of these said proposals (Yap A25). Contrary to that, student activists in UP Diliman claimed that the two regents were barred from entering the said BOR meeting. Interestingly, this is but one of many cases wherein two separate media groups presenting the same event contradict each other, either due to a particular bias or a different point of view. Such cases, especially in a presentation of facts, stain the reputation of the media as a fair and independent sector of society. This in turn will give rise to some questions regarding the primary functions of the media, certain factors that affect information processing within it, its actual contributions to society, and the areas which it could improve on, if any – questions that this paper will attempt to answer.

The word media stands for the plural term of the word “medium,” which basically defines the media: any medium or form of publication, i.e. books, pictures, newspapers, radio and television, and others. However, there is a modern definition of the media, as offered by Global Distance EducatioNet, which describes the media as “messages that are distributed through the technologies,” showing that the progress and success of the media came along with advances in present technology (“Media”).

Like mentioned in this paper’s definition, media come in many forms. Wikipedia.com disambiguates the forms of media into three: print media (through paper), electronic media (through electronic devices), and published media, better known as mass media (information “made available to the public”), though arguably the first two forms could also fall under published media, credited to the increased development and use of “multimedia,” which incorporates many forms of information processing (“Media”). Modern media operates in many parts essential to society; it has proven itself useful in practically anything, ranging from the sciences and education to politics, news, business and entertainment. However, being the human who was naturally blessed with curiosity and skepticism, some cannot help but ask, evaluate, or even criticize anything that comes out of the press, especially those with doubtful sources based on the consumer’s judgment.

But as stated by Sharon Beder, a professor-writer, people who are part of the media “often claim that their own biases and the pressures from advertisers and media owners do not affect their work because of their professional norm of 'objectivity.'” Here he presents the concept of objectivity, “the ability to view something without influence of feelings or emotions,” and also gives two main components of objectivity, “the first is 'depersonalisation' which means that journalists should not overtly express their own views, evaluations, or beliefs. The second is 'balance' which involves presenting the views of representatives of both sides of a controversy without favouring one side,” (par. 1). But is it really possible? John Swinton, a former Chief of Staff of the New York Times, was once quoted to have said in a New York Press Club congregation that

There is no such thing, at this date of the world's history, in America, as independent press. You know it and I know it. There is not one of you who dares[sic] to write your honest opinions, and if you did, you know beforehand that it would never appear in print. I am paid weekly for keeping my honest opinion out of the paper I am connected with. Others of you are paid similar salaries for similar things, and any of you who would be so foolish as to write honest opinions would be out on the streets looking for another job.
If I allowed my honest opinions to appear in one issue of my paper, before twenty-four hours my occupation would be gone. The business of the journalists is to destroy the truth; to lie outright; to pervert; to vilify; to fawn at the feet of mammon, and to sell his country and his race for his daily bread. You know it and I know it and what folly is this toasting an independent press? We are the tools and vassals of rich men behind the scenes. We are the jumping jacks, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities and our lives are all the property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes. (pars. 2-3).

Swinton pointed out the influence of the higher authorities on the media. He was not referring to his opinion as “the truth,” nor was his statement an objective one; but the fact remains that those who have the money and power have control over its domain. Businessmen, tycoons, and in some cases, the government, virtually own parts of the media sector – people who have their own interests and loyalties, who in turn influence or force their subordinates to follow suit (qtd. in “Blackout”).

Furthermore, he issued that statement back in 1953, a time when black and white television, ENIAC, and the analog radio were the most prominent advances in technology. Fast forward by half a decade, and the Fifth Estate, the so-called bloggers, add tons of information daily to the world’s largest info database, the information superhighway called the Internet (Zuckerman, pars. 2-4) More people get to speak their own versions of what they think the truth is, leading to the famous saying “truth is relative.”

Somewhat similar to Swinton’s statement but a bit more judgmental and harsher is Karl Loren’s analysis of the media’s primary purpose:

It creats[sic] chaos in many ways, chief of which is to create conflict where none had existed. Or to increase artifically[sic] a small conflict into a much larger conflict. It does this, in turn, by reporting manipulations of the truth -- where, for instance, it reports some truth in such a way as to leave a false impression, therefore create conflict, and thus create chaos.
Why does it want to create chaos? Because the media is a tool in the hands of the truly evil men who have, for so long, tried to rule the world.
The media always "aim" their news coverage "below" the standards of common morality -- in order to appeal to the least moral in our society. They do this naturally by saying that the only way they can sell their stuff is to put into their reports "what people want to hear."
They aim a bit BELOW what people want to hear -- but it is close enough to appeal to the lower fringes of the group (pars. 3-4, 8-9).

Loren’s statement makes the reader think if objectivity is really wanted in the media or even by its audience. Michael Kinsley of Slate Magazine gives a concrete example involving this dilemma, citing the stand of the American press on the September 11, 2001 tragedy perpetuated by Osama bin Laden. He notes that in light of the presented situation “pro-Osama sentiments are just not a plausible motive. The notion that journalists covertly sympathize with a mass murderer who may well be targeting journalists specifically is too far-fetched,” and that any person who would dare to do such will be openly “accused of betraying,” (par. 3). Furthermore, he adds:

No one who watches, reads, or listens could have any doubt that the American media are flagrantly biased. They are pro-America and anti-Bin Laden. On a few occasions when media outlets have allowed neutral, objective standards of newsworthiness to trump overt support for the cause—for example, on the issue of broadcasting Bin Laden's propaganda tapes—the journalists have backed down quickly when criticized (par. 4).

Kinsley’s remarks also pointed out the wide “spectrum” between opinions and facts in these instances - their national press would consider the statement “it's wrong to hijack a plane and crash it into the Pentagon” as more of fact than opinion,” (par. 6-7). He concludes his article with
This is not the familiar point that objectivity is impossible because objective reality is an ever-receding mirage or because human beings can never purge themselves of bias. These things may or may not be true, but a newspaper or TV reporter can still try to perceive and convey the facts as neutrally as possible. The point here is that even where objectivity, balance, and all those good things are possible, they're not always wanted—even by those who preach about them the most (par. 8).

Due to all these complications, the media became a molder of public opinion. But it still is imperative for the media to keep their works unblemished from bias as much as possible, to hear both sides of any conflict; Rabbi Shraga Simmons uses the Middle East conflict between Israel and the Arab nations to explain his point, showing repeatedly that the media has been particularly biased against Israel, and gives a list of what to avoid to establish a more objective report or paper, and what media consumers should be beware of so as to “avoid becoming a pawn in the media war,” citing “7 Violations of Media Objectivity” (par. 7)
:

FAIR (Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting), America’s national watchdogs and advocates for media objectivity, also gives the audiences of the media some guidelines in detecting bias in the presentations of the media. It challenges the viewer and the press to “be aware of the political perspective of the sources used in a story… demand that the media reflect the diversity of the public they serve… expose the use of double standards… avoid generalizing through use of stereotypes… and provide a proper context for the presented information,” (“Bias”).

List of Works Cited

Beder, Sharon. “Objectivity.” The Media. 28 Jan. 2007 <
http://homepage.mac.com/herinst/envcrisis/media/objectivity.html>.
Global Distance EducatioNet. “Media.” Distance Learning Resources. The World Bank Group. 28 Jan. 2007 <
http://www1.worldbank.org/disted/glossary.html>.
“How to Detect Bias in News Media.” Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting. 2000. 28 Jan. 2007 <
http://homepage.mac.com/herinst/envcrisis/media/objectivity.html>.
Kinsley, Michael. “Osama Done Told Me: So How Come Media Objectivity is Suddenly a Bad Thing?” Slate Magazine. 8 Nov. 2001. 28 Jan. 2007 .
Loren, Karl. “The True Purpose of Media on the Planet.” Moral Group Discussion. 9 May 2003. 28 Jan. 2007 <
http://www.moralgroup.com/moraldiscus/messages/42/44.html>.
“Media.” Wikipedia. 26 Jan. 2007. GNU Free License Documentation. 28 Jan. 2007 <
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media>.
“Media Blacks Out the Truth.” Does Media Blackout The Truth. Health Education Alliance for Life and Longevity. 28 Jan. 2007 <
http://www.heall.com/medicalfreedom/mediablackout.html>.
Simmons, Shraga. “7 Principles of Media Objectivity.” Objectivity and the Media. 28 Jan. 2007 <
http://www.aish.com/Israel/articles/7_principles_of_media_objectivity.asp>.
Yap, DJ. “UP regents vote 7-0 for tuition hike.” Philippine Daily Inquirer 16 Dec. 2006: A25.
Zuckerman, Mortimer B. “The Wild, Wild Web.” USNews.com. 5 Dec. 2005. 28 Jan. 2007 <
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/opinion/articles/051205/5edit.htm>.

No comments: