Special Project

You are to analyze various news sources - at least 4 different sources. Record your observations & answer the following questions:

1. What biases appear in the media regarding the branches of the federal
   government and interest groups?  
2. What presidential and congressional actions seem to create the most media coverage?  
3. Do you feel the media covers the most important issues?  If not, why not?
4. What are your views of the President's and Congress's policies, including foreign policy, domestic policy and relations with the other branches of government? 

Dana Miller

Special Project

SOURCES:

1.      SALON. www.salon.com/category/politics

2.      NBC News. www.nbcnews.com/politics

3.      NPR. www.npr.org/sections/politics

4.      FOX News. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/index.html

OBSERVATIONS:

1.      SALON

This is a liberal/left website, and they have an entire section to discuss “the right”.

Many articles on the website showed a clear, and unashamed, bias against some interest groups, especially the GOP (and conservatives in general), among others like the NRA, Citizens United, National Right to Life, etc. Noticed one article that criticized the “conservative” Supreme Court of the US for the Citizens United v. FEC ruling. Throughout the entire website, much bias, not all unfair however, was seen. Most of it was toward conservative people, especially the idea that conservative interests are always money-focused or in the best interests of the wealthy.  There is a bias about conservatives that they are “anti-woman”. Words like “delusional”, “hypocrite”, “extreme religious views”, “blowhard”, “dubious”, “love Israel”, and “screw the environment” were used to describe conservatives or their views. This site knows it’s biased and is proud of it.

2.       NBC News

This is also a liberal website. However, at first glance, I saw a more balanced collection of reporting than on SALON. In one article, for instance, there was mention of a problematic headline for Hillary Clinton, as her organization-The Clinton Foundation, apparently unethically accepted an unsolicited donation of $500,000 from Algeria. The site is clearly against most things conservative, but not as one-sided as SALON. They took an opportunity from CPAC to poke fun at conservative Presidential hopefuls with a video of their smirks set to old-timey country music. Fairly balanced coverage of the Homeland Security Budget issues was found. Some statements were not in favor of the President, although many were. I found that the site had many posts in favor of equality which in a way might remove some social order. An example would be their positive coverage of Eric Holder calling for lower proof standards in civil rights cases. They frequently cover stories of GOP leader blunders, such as recent comments made by a lawmaker about female anatomy. There is great bias among liberal websites regarding their pro-choice views.

3.       NPR

NPR is a pretty neutral news source, funded by the government and all, however, I noticed that there were a lot of references to “conservatives” and no mention of “liberals”. It is almost like they want readers to identify or agree with their reporting and then to see conservatives as “the other guys” or as a group that readers are not a part of. Maybe this is due to the great partisan divide in Congress and the fact that our Legislative branch has a GOP majority and our Executive branch, namely our President, is Democrat. I notice strong equality themes in NPR and also a lot of legitimately balanced reporting as well.  Both NBC and NPR were less biased than Salon.

4.       FOX News

This is a conservative news outlet on the opposite end of the spectrum from the liberal ones. Not as harsh as SALON, but not quite as neutral in its views as NPR. Like SALON, they are not trying to hide their biases. It used the word “coffers” with a negative connotation to get across a negative slant on Obama’s affirmative action in regards to illegal immigrants, and the immigrants getting to go to college free here in America. They focus on some issues that other news stations ignore, for instance the Benghazi scandal which has been lightly reported by liberal news outlets, although I did see it mentioned on one of the liberal sites. I see a bit of a bias toward Christianity as there are mostly posts about Catholicism in their Religion page. FOX was the only major, fairly reliable news outlet that I found that did not bias toward the left.

DISCUSSION:

What biases appear in the media regarding the branches of the federal
government and interest groups?  

~In the media I see some biases regarding the executive branch from the Conservative side especially. They seem to be critical of his actions (not necessarily bad, since elected leaders must be accountable for their actions) especially regarding his foreign policy and immigration reform. I am not sure of the reason for this bias, maybe it is to get more GOP (interest group) support among voters, but after perusing the White House website, I see quite a bit of reasonable policy coming from the White House regarding the issues most criticized.  I see some bias however throughout the majority of media outlets toward the left/liberal direction. Judging from our close elections in recent years, the American people are not so shifted in majority. This denotes a bias.  The media, even if in minor ways, tend to support, or write about in more positive ways, typical liberal agenda, i.e. abortion, equality, higher taxation of the rich, entitlements, political correctness, civil rights, immigration reform, and much more.

The biggest means of biases I saw was a bias against interest groups.  I felt that most criticisms and biases arise when a person (i.e. President, lawmaker, member of executive branch, etc.), group of persons (i.e. Supreme Court judges, Senate majority, etc.), or interest group (GOP, Democratic Party, Nat’l. Right to Life Committee, Planned Parenthood Action Fund, etc.) is polarized into “liberal” or “conservative” camps. Then once labeled, the respective news sources keep those labels and take sides. Partisanship and “liberal vs. conservative” were definitely the number 1 and 2 avenues of biases I saw. 

I’d like to take a moment to note an interesting confirmation I found after I had answered this question and done my research: http://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/Media-Bias-Is-Real-Finds-UCLA-6664 is an article I ran across while studying for this special project. Although published in 2005, I feel that it still reflects what I have seen in doing this project. I thought it was worth mentioning.

What presidential and congressional actions seem to create the most media coverage?  

~The actions of the President and Congress which seem to generate the most media coverage are ones that are hot-button issues of the day. Anything that will bring about a buzz. Some major topics include: immigration(like Obama’s recent executive order), foreign policy(currently ISIL/middle-eastern issues), anything to do with LGBT rights/civil liberties/abortion/voter ID, funding/budget shortfalls, partisan conflicts, education reform(budgeting/common core), healthcare (Obamacare), and religious freedom/equality/extremism.

Do you feel the media covers the most important issues?  If not, why not?

~Yes and no. The important issues are covered, but honestly, you have to dig through so much soft news, that it is sometimes hard to find the stories you’d like to read. Some examples: #TheDress-is it gold and white or black and blue? or the inevitable “5 Sex Secrets” articles and celebrity gossip in many news outlets. I feel that news dilution by soft news is one of the major problems with media today. But this will not go away any time soon, because the public enjoys the “wow!” stories so much.

What are your views of the President's and Congress's policies, including foreign policy, domestic policy, and relations with the other branches of government? 

               ~I will openly admit that I am a bit confused on what to believe at this point in some areas. I like reading the www.congress.gov website and the www.whitehouse.gov website for information because I know that the only slant that I will encounter is that the government officials are doing just the right thing. I can anticipate that and think for myself. Navigating the media reports on these issues is more tricky, because it brings in many other slants, liberal v conservative, partisanship, personal opinions of reporters, and more. However I know that a free press is necessary to hold the government accountable and to have reports that are independent of direct government control. Knowing what I do now about bias on both sides of the liberal-conservative spectrum, but especially liberal bias, I struggle to bring forth a stable group of ideals for myself about the current foreign and domestic policy, and relations between the branches of government. However, upon researching, I do know some basics and will set them forth.

               My view of the President’s foreign policy, is positive. I have read his positions thoroughly on www.whitehouse.gov and am thankful that he is taking a stand against ISIL.  I think that the American government handled the Ebola outbreak efficiently, although the media would have had the public think otherwise and go into a panic. I do not appreciate the way that the media sensationalizes the issues of foreign policy. They instill much fear into citizens. I think that Congress, is also doing a decent job with their foreign policy. I appreciate the increased sanctions on North Korea, however, I am not very happy that the President and Congress are becoming more open to trade with Cuba, and that we are major trade partners with China. Both of those countries, and others, are extremely oppressive to their citizens and restrict freedoms extensively with their communist governments. I note that many upcoming bills in the Foreign Affairs category of Congress have to do with promoting peace, freedom, and equality in other countries. I agree that a peaceful world is a major part of maintaining security for our country. As long as international support does not take away from domestic needs, I am okay with this approach. Isolationism does not work in today’s connected world.

               My views on the current domestic policy of our President and Congress are more mixed. This is where the rubber often hits the road with the media. They have a hay-day with these issues. Domestic policy is the main stuff of our life in America. In Congress, it is divided into 6 main groups of issues. (1) Children and Families. I feel that the current approach to handling these issues is solid. The government seems to attempt to provide at least equality of opportunity to the disadvantaged. However, I feel that welfare is taken advantage of and needs greater oversight to prevent abuse by recipients. (2) Domestic Security and Immigration. This is also a tricky subject, however upon reading the President’s statements about Immigration, I tend to agree with what he is saying. However, media reports that crime rates in border areas is greatly increased and that it is a mess in those areas. Border security has been increased, but to what effect? How exactly does the President plan on implementing his plan to legalize certain immigrants and get them started paying taxes like they ought? There are a lot of unanswered questions for me in this area. As for domestic security, police brutality is a current issue that is ongoing. I feel that this, while immensely important to punish when it occurs, has been overblown by the media and also citizens. The majority of police officers are not racists and do not arbitrarily kill citizens. (3) Education and Labor. Obama is a huge proponent of education and Congress is currently working hard to continue improving our education system in America. I agree with Obama’s raising of the Pell Grant. This is immensely helpful. I am grateful for student aid offered to individuals today through government grants and loans. Obama has proposed free community college opportunity for all, and I am currently unsure about this as I wonder where the funding will come for such a thing. (4) Health Insurance and Financing. I am very disappointed that in the Land of the Free we are penalized for not purchasing health insurance. I understand why the legislation requires that, but am still disappointed that another way could not be found. I am also discouraged that the passing of the “Obamacare” Act was so disorganized and wrought with failures, although it has succeeded in being enacted. (5) Health Services and Research. Under this category, I am supportive for the most part of actions, but as has been recently in the media, am unsatisfied with the actions of our government regarding veteran’s health affairs. (6) Income Security. Social Security…I am not sure what to believe on this one. Conservative media uses this topic to vilify government spending on entitlements. “Will there be any Social Security money left when we retire?”, they ask. I truly don’t know.

               Relations with other branches of government can be tense at times. Most recently, the President’s veto of the Keystone pipeline bill is an example.  I see much partisan conflict, even on the part of the President between Congress. I wish that the different branches would try to compromise more with one another and stop the filibustering and delays to necessary funding and laws that need to be passed.  I think the media likes to cover these issues and use them to make one side or the other look bad.