The Media

From, Wikipedia, "

One of the leading voices in the U.S. on the subject of Journalistic Standards and Ethics is the Society of Professional Journalists. The Preamble to its Code of Ethics states:

...public enlightenment is the forerunner of justice and the foundation of democracy. The duty of the journalist is to further those ends by seeking truth and providing a fair and comprehensive account of events and issues. Conscientious journalists from all media and specialties strive to serve the public with thoroughness and honesty. Professional integrity is the cornerstone of a journalist's credibility. "

One of the challenges we face in modern times is a media that is becoming more and more biased with each passing year. For example, I mentioned that if Harper tried to push a bill with the intention of having his opposition crush it, we'd never know that our Prime Minister tried to pull a fast one unless one or more of the opposition devoted their campaign proving it...and why is this, you ask? Simply put, we live in a society where every political journalist has a leaning, and where democratic journalism is when a conservative and a liberal both speak to the same issue to offer both points of view...a quick shows a very large flaw in this, in that you have to have two people tackle every political issue, or you only get either a conservative viewpoint or a liberal viewpoint...the case in point to this is watching the news on television...CTV has liberal journalists that they bring in for elections, but they have their conservative journalists all on staff, meaning that any time outside of an election (or special occasion that they feel requires a liberal viewpoint), the only viewpoints they offer are conservative...

This problem can extend beyond politics though, because certain companies of influence can effect what appears in the news and what doesn't...now, I'm not saying that everything that happens should appear in the news (for example, if the local refinery has a fire and no one can see it, I'd rather not have to worry about), but there are some things that don't make the news that should.

An example of this can be found in Saint John where nearly every major street in the city has natural gas pipes underneath them. Keep in mind that the pipes have a guaranteed kill radius of 10 metres if they explode and a danger radius of 300 metres (danger radius was actually on a letter I received because my apartment is within 300 metres of the pipeline)...it would seem like it would be the responsible thing to print these numbers in the newspaper (or air them on the news), but that hasn't happened (and almost certainly won't)...the problem lies in the fact that the purpose of the pipes is to heat some of the entities owned by the company that owns the paper (meaning that their private interest and the public's interest are in direct conflict). Now, I'm not saying that this company is wrong to have the pipes (in fact, I'd go so far as to suggest that it probably was a great decision), but I think that it is wrong to own a media outlet (in their case, all the newspapers in New Brunswick) when the size of your companies creates a very real possibility that one of them should be in the news (even if it isn't in the company's best interest)...

And herein lies a massive problem...I'm not suggesting that this company is censoring our news intentionally to prevent us from finding things out, but it is scary to have the final say on all our newspapers go to someone who has a vested interest in our refineries, pulp and paper mills, lube plant, some hardware stores, softwood lumber deals, our oil prices (and gasoline by extension), and even themselves. Can you imagine if someone goes on strike, and opens the paper the next day to read a scathing article about how petty they are? Now granted, it would likely be true, if they were on strike from the company, but still, what would be the incentive to not highlight how greedy the workers are being?

Another subject that gets shoddy coverage is sports...anyone who watches a large amount of hockey has surely watched Don Cherry rant about "good-ole Canadian boys"...or if you watch Sportsnet, every second word when they are talking about hockey seems to be Leafs...it doesn't matter that Toronto is a longshot to make the playoffs, and that a large number of non-Toronto fans get stuck watching this, they still drone on...the problem I have isn't even the subject, though...it is the fact that some media outlets pay people who are less informed than a large subsection of the fanbase to be "reporters"...For guys like Eklund, a rumor reporter who charges for his rumors, there is no punishment for the fact that he steals a large amount of his rumors from internet message boards and makes up virtually all of the rest...his success rate with his rumors is so low that a random fan making everything up would have a 50/50 shot of being right just as often...

Bias in the sports media becomes a problem when the announcers tell you that the team looks like a playoff team when they haven't got a shot (hello, Pittsburgh Pirates)...because teams employ a large number of these sports journalists, they have to start from a biased position.

One last bias the media shows is a bias of reaction...media outlets (newspapers, radio stations, and television stations) are run as businesses, meaning that they choose to convey the news that is going to attract people more...this is why local government approving menial bills is something you have to really dig to find, but if one of them calls another something like "pompous" (which would likely be true, but would still somehow merit an apology in their ridiculous world), it would be front page news...this is also why groups like Greenpeace, the Canadian Cancer Society and PETA are often relegated to lesser sections or left out completely, even if their message is as important or more important...

People often look at America in jest (especially CNN)...but one thing you have to appreciate about their system is that even when they are trying to scare the crap out of everyone, they keep their priorities straight...that is, the local issue comes first, unless it is major...yes, they still have the same biases against issues that they don't think will sell, but they tend to argue everything down the middle, more or less (except hot button issues), because in reality, the only point of view that matters is the truth...