"Objectivity" and War: Dissecting Media Bias

Over the past hundred years America has seen the rise of what is inaccurately referred to in mainstream discourse as the "objective", "professional" mainstream media. "Objective" media reporting is said to exist when reporters divorce the issues in which they are covering from their personal convictions and values, regurgitating only the basic facts so that citizens may make their own decisions concerning the validity of specific social issues. Under this philosophy, it is considered unprofessional and undesirable to become an active agent in critically analyzing and evaluating the stories in which one is reporting.

Unfortunately, what is almost never discussed by those supporting the fallacy of an "objective" media is the fact that there is almost nothing "objective", "professional", or "neutral" about any of the reporting in the corporate media. Flagrant corporate media bias is a reality that has been well documented in dissident intellectual circles for years. This bias has become much more obvious over the last year, specifically with the corporate media's refusal to criticize the Bush Administration and its war on Iraq. [Full Article]

Patriotic Correctness

On our domestic shores, we have our own fog of war: call it "patriotic correctness." Peter Arnett's firing by NBC for the thoughtcrime of granting an interview to Iraqi TV is only the latest and most dramatic example of how patriotic correctness operates and how it limits journalism. A long list of journalists have been fired or denounced for expressing doubts about US leaders,

Pressures for patriotism have been felt by people such as 60-year-old Stephen Downs, who was ordered by security guards at the Crossgates Mall in Albany to remove the "Give Peace a Chance" T-shirt he had bought in the mall.

Patriotic correctness has also extended to colleges, where radical professors are accused of treason and warned to keep quiet. At Irvine Valley College in California, Vice President of Instruction Dennis White wrote a March 27 memo: "It has come to my attention that several faculty members have been discussing the current war within the context of their classrooms. We need to be sure that faculty do not explore this activity within the context of their classroom unless it can be demonstrated, to the satisfaction of this office, that such discussions are directly related to the approved instructional requirements and materials associated with those classes." [Full Article]

Television Coverage of War: Reality TV run amuck?

During the first few days of the war, most of us were riveted by the non-stop coverage of the bombing campaign and subsequent ground invasion of Iraq. I certainly was. No matter which television channel you watched, you couldn't remove yourself from at least some update on the progress of Gulf War II, this time dubbed "Operation Iraqi Freedom." War coverage resembled a hit film, what with the expensive graphics, round-the-clock coverage, and endless debates on whether or nor the bombing had killed Saddam Hussein. Even the opening rounds of the sacrosanct NCAA men's basketball tournament were relegated to ESPN while CBS covered the opening stages of the aerial bombardment. Nevertheless, even as we watched, many sought out coverage of the invasion that we felt could teach us something, or coverage we felt reflected our position on the war.

CNN seemed to be the first news source for most people. Given my personal distaste for Fox News, the original 24-hour Cable News Network seemed to be a tolerable alternative. Sitting in Brewster's Lounge listening to music and studying, I found it easy to follow the news solely from the newswire running continuously at the bottom of the CNN screen. Just following the ticker, I was able to discern that as of last Thursday, 10,000 precision-guided missiles had been dropped on Iraq since the bombing began. There were a lot of figures of the number of protesters arrested around the United States-and little to no figures on the size of the anti-war demonstrations. Later on, another bit flashed on the ticker reading, "UN worried that Iraqi children may confuse humanitarian packages with bomblets - both have similar color". I also noted that most of CNN's sources came from the Pentagon - which supposedly ensures their accuracy. During a commercial break, headphones still on, I noted a commercial promoting none other than CNN, with a graphic reading "TRUST CNN" in what must have been 72-point font. Curious, I took off my headphones to see a Navy recruitment ad with the slogan "Life. Liberty. And the pursuit of those who threaten it!" set to the backdrop of cheesy nu-metal and scenes that could have been lifted from Top Gun. Then they came back from commercial. [Full Article]

Rush to Judgment?

WJBC adds Limbaugh to the lineup, but Keith & Beth keep the faith afternoons

Last month, WJBC 1230 AM inserted Rush Limbaugh into its 11am-2pm weekday slot. For people interested in balanced coverage on the then-impending war against Iraq, the selection and timing couldn't have been worse.

Limbaugh, still the nation's pre-eminent right-wing talk show host, is undeniably talented and still occasionally entertaining, but hardly objective and, at times, downright lazy. His diatribes against "liberals," "anti-war protesters," and any other targets-of-the-day are accepted and encouraged by an army of "Dittoheads" across the country with little to no questioning or accountability.

The "Dittoheads," of course, aren't just fans - they're customers. And radio is a business. Although WJBC has long been one of the highest rated AM stations in the country by audience share, in the key target demographic of males 25-54, WJBC has routinely finished second in midday Arbitron ratings to the 50,000-watt Chicago AM juggernaut WLS - Chicago's broadcasting home for Limbaugh. For a 75 year-old radio station with unquestionable community roots, losing the ratings war in this critical demographic to a competitor 150 miles away has been hard to swallow. [Full Article]