Media influence

I was looking at the headlines on CNN this morning, and was struck by
how they and the other news organizations present stories. I know it's
a blinding flash of the obvious to say that the news outlets can be
biased, but this was more in how things were presented or what they
didn't say, rather than bias. The reader's impression is equally shaped
by these things, just as it is by intentional bias.

One headline was about the crash of a tour helicopter at the Grand
Canyon. The short story was accompanied by a photograph of the most
rugged part of the canyon, and a statement that the helicopter was
flying to the bottom of the canyon. That would lead the reader to
believe that the crash occurred in the canyon itself, and lead to the
inevitable hand wringing about why flights are allowed into the canyon
at all. Yet on further examination, the article states that the
helicopter crashed near Peach Springs, which is south of the canyon in a
relatively level area, and not nearly as rugged as the canyon itself.

A second headline was about the rescue of a person with a medical
problem from the South Pole. This was the third such rescue in the last
few years, and I was curious about what aircraft was being used, and
whether it was a military or private aircraft. The article made no
mention of those details.

I can recall that the first rescue was made by an Air National Guard
C-130, and that the crew was hailed as heroes, with every leg of their
trip covered extensively by the US media. There was live coverage of
the landing back in South America. The second rescue was performed by a
Canadian air charter company, and there was hardly a mention of the
flight or the crew.

I looked at MSNBC to find out more, but they had no mention of the
flight at all. CBS had a similar story to that on CNN. ABC said that
the aircraft was a DeHavilland Twin Otter, but no mention of the air
charter company.

Out of curiosity, I made a more general search, and found news articles
from the UK, Canada, New Zealand, India, Germany, Australia, and many
other countries that mentioned that the aircraft was Canadian-built, and
that the air charter company was Kenn Borek Air, from Calgary, Alberta,
which is the same company that performed the earlier rescue. No US
articles contained that information. It makes me wonder if this omission
was intentional, and why they would avoid giving credit where it was
due.

James Robinson wrote:

(points out examples of US coverage of polar rescue flights, contrasts
that with very little coverage of the current and recent flights made
by CDN pilots working for Kenn Borek Air)

Generally the American media does not like to report bad or disturbing
political, social, burecratic or human nature news in or about the
United States for fear that viewers will turn off one network and jump
to another. They all carefully balance their 6:30 pm national news
and make sure it is weighed more towards neutral and feel-good stories
(you'd think that the national nightly news casts would be longer than
a measly 1/2 hour, given the huge news departments of the 3 major
networks). Their commercials occurr at exactly the same times (and
usually all run the same insurance company or drug commercials).

Canadian cable viewers can, and do, compare the coverage of the US
networks along with CBC and CTV news channels. I expected the US
networks to not mention that the rescue was being done by CDN planes
and pilots. I don't even think that the US networks mentioned that
the sick person was American. And as you say, it's not the first time
these pilots flew sick Americans home for emergency treatment.

But to be fair, since the NSF funds the majority (?) of south-pole
research, and since there are 10 times as many Yanks as Canucks, it's
not surprising that the people that need to be flown out will be
Americans. In this case, the sick person wants to remain anonymous,
and maybe that's the largest reason why this story isin't getting much
press in the US (the US press loves it when there's a name and a face
to attach to a story). And it's not surprising that Kenn Borek air
will do the flying, since they have the NSF transportation contract to
that location. Now why Borek has the contract vs a US (or South
American) flight company - I don't know.

http://www.canoe.ca/CNEWS/World/2003...198236-cp.html

Generally the American media does not like to report bad or disturbing
political, social, burecratic or human nature news in or about the
United States for fear that viewers will turn off one network and jump
to another.

Media bias is as old as media reporting. Although it has only been since
right-wing radio shows and cable stations such as Fox News that the lack of
veracity in news reporting has been a popular theme. The bias of news
outlets such as CBS news and the NY Times has been recognized for years,
although it would be naive to expect that the media would report such
circumstances. Or even admit that such exists.

I find it interesting that young soldiers serving in Iraq recognize the
limitations of the western media represented in that country. Consider the
following:

start
snip
I managed to latch onto a press pool translator to help us through a few
translation problems. TranMan was so impressed that a week later he brought
along several big media war-cons. Media aholes not impressed, took no notes,
took no pictures, took no video, and chewed the pool translator for wasting
their valuable time.

I managed to tell the CNN (or CBS, I know it was C something-something) reporter
that if I had the kids throw something at us would that then give him his story?
A comment which hit a very raw nerve with Mr. Unbiased Reporter. US Press
still tries to pretend they are unbiased. At least the BBC is honest enough to
let us know that is not the case with them. Word is that on one wall in their
BD office they add a new smiley face sticker for each soldier killed in Iraq.
end


And several weeks after this soldier's account was circulated the BBC admitted
to fabrication of various facts in stories from Iraq. Interesting since the
BBC was once the watermark for integredy in news reporting.

The political bias of newspapers in the UK is well known. You do not pick up
a copy of The Times, Daily Standard, The Guardian, The Telegraph or The
Independent - to name but a few - without also knowing their bias in news
reporting and in their editorials. And media outlets in the US would do well
to make their political affiliations better known. The continued blurring of
the lines between news and editorial - while hiding behind the 1st Amendment -
can hardly be regarded as beneficial to their audience.

And you may expect that US media reporting will have a major impact on the
elections of 2004. In fact, I believe that the best reporting of the 2000
Florida fiasco was provided by newspapers in the UK. By that time the media
pundits in the US had dropped all pretense of being an impartial source for
election news.