"There is no such thing at this date of the world's history, in America, as an independent press. You know it and I know it. There is not one of you that dares 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 opinion out of the paper that I am connected with. Others of you are paid similar salaries for similar things, and any of you who would be so foolish to write honest opinions would be out on the street looking for another job."
- John R. Swinton, British-born US journalist speaking to a meeting of fellow journalists
If you think that Swinton's quotation applies to your country today, you may be interested to learn his pertinent dates: 1829-1901. He wrote during the 19th century.
As a former full time and now part time free-lance journalist myself, I can assure you that the political persuasions and preferences of the newspapers I wrote for always played a role in my writing. In every case, the boas of the owner is a "given."
The closest any journalist or broadcaster will come to speaking against the favoured political party of the medium's owner is when he or she presents a news item that is said to be balanced in the sense that it presents material that all parties would be comfortable with. Few of these appear because they take too long to research and to present.
The political preferences of newspapers and television stations (and networks in the case of the US) are usually well known to everyone who goes out of their way to find several sources for political stories. The casual viewer or reader may not know them.
Learning the point of view (and the rest of the facts, if any were omitted) of all parties to a story is hard work. Even writers have difficulty getting all sides.
It's a lot of work. For many of us, it's too much work.
But, based on information we know to be biased, some of us freely express our opinions on political matters about which we often know very little. Biased opinions emerge from biased sources.
That's democracy. It's also democracy when people have the right to search other sources for facts and opinions so that they may express considered opinions of their own and cast ballots from an informed perspective.
Whether the informed among us point out to the ill-informed how biased and paltry their information is and where they can learn more of the facts is a matter of personal choice.
We live with the results of our actions.
Bill Allin
'Turning It Around: Causes and Cures for Today's Epidemic Social Problems,' striving to present a thorough and balanced point of view.
Learn more at http://billallin.com
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 12
The old "if it bleeds, it leads" maxim is not going down without a fight.
And I do know a lot of people who get all their opinions based on 30 second news sound bites. Sad, really.
People claim they don't have time to delve into the real news, in depth, but they have time to watch TV for hours each day.
In other words, on any matter that is controversial, the bes that anyone can do (even politicians) is to make a well informed guess.
True, it is work, and if the topic is important to you, it is important you seek several sources over time to make a descent(?) opinion about it for yourself.
Carol, we each need acknowledgement and affirmation of our worth as individuals in a large society. As soon as we make known our needs--likely through stepping forward to make ourselves known in some way--we set ourselves up for criticism or even attacks from others. There is nothing fair about this, but it's natural. Call it the pecking order or what you will. It's how all of nature works, both animals and plants.
We can make children aware of what they need to do to be noticed and to get the acknowledgement and recognition they need (as well as the touching and love they need), but also that there may be or will likely be those who will attack them for that. And that's all right. We don't need to give any recognition to those who attack us without reason. We need to teach this to kids so that they can cope with circumstances when they find themselves in them.
I have not read Blink.
There are people in Gather who will express the most outrageous opinions and attack others, even those they care nothing about. They get acknowledgement this way. It may not be the best, not like a good hug, but it's some recognition. It's the kind that a child gets by misbehaving in school. It's real.
John S., it's decent. Finding those several sources is hard, especially if we go looking for them on a specific subject. It's better to gather them by reading and viewing widely on a regular basis.
As Wilhelmine said, BBC is pretty good. CBC is good if you can set aside its love of war reporting and its decidedly Liberal (Canadian political party) persuasion. These both give more facts than most sources.
I hit the BBC fairly often, together with many more sites. TV, magazines, papers, etc. when I can as well. I don't think I've been to the CBC much, if at all. I'll take a look.
That "gather" was an unintended pun I should better have omitted in favour of something less volatile.