Imagine a journalist understanding their role when reporting news. I wonder if it would start revolutions, ruin lives or cause world wars. Perhaps that’s a bit extreme, but they all are possible scenarios. The dissemination of information is as old as cavemen writing on the walls of caves. There’s great responsibility when reporting and passing on information that used to require ethics and morals. “It is our contention that information rationally commits its creators, producers, communicators, consumers and users to both epistemological and ethical standards that are universal and thus globally prescriptive” (Spence & Quinn pg 227). Spence and Quinn are the authors of an article printed in the journal of Mass Media Ethics in October of 2008 titled: Information Ethics as a Guide for New Media. They go on to say, “this epistemology of information logically commits its disseminators to certain ethical principles and values such as honesty, sincerity, truthfulness, trustworthiness, reliability, and justice” (pg 267-268). Its honesty and integrity that come into conflict on any given Fox News broadcast.
Corporate interests drive the media today as presented in the two documentaries Manufacturing Consent: Noam Chomsky and the Media, and Outfoxed Watching Outfoxed, In Outfoxed, the viewer gets a firsthand look into how the messages and news are skewed to frame political and personal agenda’s. All from a news agency that brands itself as providing fair and balanced coverage and perspectives on news.
The networks coherent narrative of reporting to me, is their ability to create and frame current life experiences, string ambiguous events and stories told by a variety of deemed experts, guests, panelists to hosts that pose as reporters/broadcasters. So you get a feeling or empathy to the characters created. The 24-hour broadcast day is broken down into segments of personalities that anchor 30 to 60 minute shows. Shows like Studio B with Shepard Smith, Your world with Neil Cavuto, Hannity, and of course The O’Reilly Factor to name a few.
As viewers, we’re more predisposed to accepting what’s being said on TV when presented in the newscast format of a person sitting at a desk, studio table, or standing in a chroma keyed virtual set. Bolstered by a salience to the media to accept what’s being said as fact, Fox News has taken their agenda setting goals a giant step further. Adding dramatic music, high production value graphics, dramatic sensational topics and headlines, Fox News directs their narratives of designed and fabricated stories to their viewers. All this wouldn’t be bad, except for the fact that the person that owns the network-Rupert Murdoch- owns other media properties that reach an audience of four point seven billion people. All the media properties Mr Murdoch owns offer and reflect his political and ideological viewpoints. This coherent narrative then disseminates to their huge audience, re-enforces similar messaging though multiple media sources, and viewer salience to the message, agendas can be created, disseminated and delivered. Or as past Fox News reporters and producers state as propaganda. Stories that Fox News produces.
From a branding standpoint, Fox calls themselves Fair and Balanced. Neither is true or accurate. As reported in the documentary, Fox blurs the lines in their reporting and report from stories from their personal opinion, which makes it hard to prove them wrong-as seen in the segment of the documentary where Jeremy Glick is assaulted by Bill O’Reilly. The documentary showed many examples of conservative republican guests and their messaging appearing as compared to how many guests with the opposing viewpoint appeared. It also went on to prove the viewers that watch the Fox news broadcasts had inaccurate views of issues.
When you consistently brand yourself or service as being fair and balanced, and if you say it enough, then your viewers will start believing it. And with the Internet and web becoming a prominent resource for news, many of the messages from Fox or other sources, get passed along or mixed with other sources and then re-reported. If Fox is sending out propaganda branded as fair and balanced and it’s picked up by a web or other journalist and reported, then more bad or inaccurate news gets out, and no one even knows the source of the message but still believe it. The slogan Fair and Balanced does a lot to add and build credibility for the networks messaging and keeps viewers coming back, which is good for the advertisers which is good for the network.
Its hard to say what the fallout is from the hacking scandal will do to Murdoch. Although the Hollywood Reporter posted an article on the 17th of November, saying there is a silver lining to the scandal. “The company has had to accept a much more modern structure of the kind they have never had with Rupert as the unquestioned decision-maker. The company has become more shareholder friendly as it has had to modernize its governance and scale back family’s control.” Which is a good thing since it may actually provide more fair and balanced perspectives.
Are there biases in the media? Of course there are. Air America offers a left-leaning perspective, while Fox offers a right slant. Rhetorica.net/bias points out there is commercial bias, (organization is in the money making business so product reflects advertisers), temporal bias, (reporting what’s fresh and immediate), Visual Bias, (fancy motion graphics, geekie or awkward video and stills of a side of a story, Bad News Bias (bad news gets better ratings than good news), Status Quo Bias (reporting American way is the only way type reporting), Fairness Bias, (follows the coherent narrative type reporting), Expediency Bias, (speed of delivery of news affects the accuracy) and Glory Bias (reporters want reward/recognition for being a reporter). But as far as bias’ go, there should still be a universal ethic for the dissemination of information by journalists. Spence and Quinn suggest Alan Gewirth’s principal of ethics philosophy “a complementary account of the good-a set of virtues, values, and moral sentiments-are needed to guide moral action suited to journalism.” (p 276). But as we see with monopolistic ownership, along with an agenda setting tradition, and some propaganda, mixed to dynamic graphics, urgent music and personal opinion, it’s hard to focus on what is accurate, what is true and what is fair and balanced. As Bernard Cohen said, “The press may not tell you what to think but it’s successful at telling g you what to think about.” Mr. Murdoch and his constituents realize that much.
References
Spence, E H., & Quinn, A (2008) Information ethics as a guide for new media.
Journal of Mass Media & Ethics 23: 264-279 Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.
Griffin, E. A., (2012). A First look at communication theory. New York. McGraw-Hill
The Rhetorical Network Internet source Rhetorica.net/bias.htm
Griffin, E. A., (2012). A First look at communication theory. New York. McGraw-Hill
Turner, Mimi & Szalai, George Why the news corp. scandal may have a silver lining on
line article. http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/news-corp-scandal-rupert-murdoch-263097
Gewirth, A. (1978) Reason and morality. Chicago: University Chicago Press