Selection of Detail: Media Bias

Rhetorical Analysis: Media Bias and Selection of Detail

Part I: Selection of Detail: Quotations

This past summer, Atlanta Falcons Quarterback Michael Vick was indicted on federal charges pertaining to animal cruelty. The team’s starting running back, Warrick Dunn, had this to say: "I don't think anybody on this team right now is hoping that Mike comes back."

From the quote, it would appear that the team had abandoned their quarterback. However, take a look at what Dunn actually said:

"I don't think anybody on this team right now is hoping that Mike comes back," Dunn said. "If he comes back, that's great, but I just think right now we're at point where the guys that are here are trying to get better and move on down the road. Mike is going to be missed and has been missed, but at the same time you have to go on."

The quote in context suggests a different attitude than the former quote by itself. Politicians, celebrities, and athletes often complain about being misquoted. It is not so much that published statements are false, but more so that they do not accurately relate what the person intended to say.

Clearly, by carefully selecting information, a writer can write factually but still (intentionally) misrepresent who or what they are writing about.

YOUR TASK: Select an extended quote or speech by a political candidate. Intentionally select a portion that makes the candidate look bad. As you complete this task, consider that all campaigns hire people such as yourself to exactly what you are being asked to do.

Please post your selected quote to the message boards under the project title. Beneath your selection, cut and paste the larger quote.

Part II: Selection of Detail: New Articles

Reporters are to OBJECTIVELY report on current events; however, as humans, they occasionally allow their own views to affect their reporting. Though their writing is fact-based, reporters CHOOSE which facts their readers see.

Infamously, during the 2004 Presidential Campaign, CBS News chose to run a story about George W. Bush’s service in the National Guard. The story included documents alleged to prove that President Bush did not fulfill his military obligations as a young man. The other networks passed on the story because none could authenticate the documents—they were allegedly copies of lost originals, but no one could disprove that they could also be forgeries. Why did CBS run the story? Lead anchor Dan Rather was a well-known Democratic supporter. Insiders said that he pushed to have the story run despite concerns. In effect, Dan Rather selected to share the story with his audience—probably due to his own political beliefs. This decision unofficially cost him his job after a lengthy career, as most independent observers believed that there was not enough evidence to run the story. This example illustrates the power of “selection of detail” in news reporting. We see what others want us to see—and that affects that way in which we both view and understand the world around us.

YOUR TASK: Each class will be assigned the same series of recent news articles written by different reporters on the same subject. Read all of the articles, searching each for evidence in which a reporter’s use of the facts might suggest bias in favor of a particular person or position.  Focus on the information presented to us by the reporter. Who was interviewed? (And who was NOT interviewed?) What facts are cited? (And what facts are NOT cited?) Does the weight of facts presented favor one side or another? Does the reporter allow for people to counter criticism?

Consider the connotations of the writer's word choice. For example, if President Bush does not come to an agreement with Democratic Party leaders, the following headlines could all be used:

Bush and Democratic Leaders Reach Impasse

Bush Fails to Reach Consensus

Bush Stands Firm on Veto

--Note how the words used give a completely different sense to the matter and subtlely manipulate the readers' opinions.

You can find the article links on the message boards under this project title. Please post your thoughts and analysis to the same board.

Part III: Comparing Factual Accounts.

We all know that four people can watch the same event and come away with four completely different accounts of what happened. The same can be true in news reporting. Who do we trust when we the presented facts differ? All selected facts may be true, but when put together in different groupings, they may tell divergent stories. 

TASK: Your teacher will select a current news story. In the computer lab, you will work with a team, locating, printing, and analyzing new articles from four different sources (i.e., news services and reporters). Be sure to copy the source data. Read each account. What differences do you note? Would these differences affect the way a person responds to the story?

Suggested websites are as follows:

CNN.com

Foxnews.com

Washingtonpost.com

Washingtontimes.com

Dallasnews.com

Teacher Websites © 2009 SchoolWorld