|
Unbiased media might not exist, but unbiased news, or at the very least unbiased news reporting should exist. It's really a question of what is and what is not covered in news that makes a bias appear. These days, the news can't cover everything, and the selection of stories supposedly shows bias.
That said, the main reason is that with the forms of entertainment available expanding at an enormous pace, there's suddenly more to do than read the newspaper in the morning. People don't seek out news, don't desire nuanced understandings of what's happening, and don't make enough effort to distinguish style and substance. This trend has been noted for some time, but it's only getting worse.
This effects the news in an important way. Why just get the news when you can also be told what to think about it? It saves time, and news is more than just events, right? Here's where the danger is, and here's why commentary is more dangerous. Covering the news is one thing, but when reporters become advocates, they cease to be journalists, and become lawyers. Bias will always be there, but when you replace factual reporting with commentary, and assume that the viewers know what's going on, the debate becomes less meaninginful, not more meaningful, and partisanship increases.
__________________
"Erections lasting more than 4 hours, though rare, require immediate medical attention."
|