Recently I was speaking with an older gentleman whom I otherwise hold in high regard. Somehow we started talking about Fox News...he's an avid viewer and I think he was trying to relate a segment he had seen. I mentioned how I had no trust in Fox News, as it's is slanted so far towards a Tea Party/neoConservative point of view that it's hard to believe anything one sees on there. "Oh no, it's true. It's fair and balanced. It says that it is."
I didn't really have a good response to his, because when you're so totally believing that your own truth is infallible, how can you even imagine it to be otherwise? How can I point out the inherent bias on "Your World With Neil Cavuto" or "Fox and Friends" when it seems so benign to those who take it in everyday? It's not like they come out and admit any form of bias, or disclose to their viewers that they hold to a certain ideology. So how can we tell that this bias exists without driving ourselves crazy by having to watch this crap and point it out each time it happens?
I don't watch Fox News intentionally, but it seems to be on everywhere you go. I'll notice it is on the TV at the rec center, or be at somebody's house where it is has been left on, and so sometimes it will present itself to me even though I don't care for it. But I've noticed a few things that show its bias for anybody who is willing to see it.
(Necessary admission: Yes, every newschannel has their own bias. MSNBC tilts liberal in particular. I get it. But I live in a red state where far too many people assume Fox News is gospel truth. Where I live I don't have to deal with people regularly who think that because Chris Matthews or Rachel Maddow said something that it must necessarily be true. If I did, I'd probably be just as annoyed with them and be writing about them. But I don't, so I won't.)
-1. What are the 10-word talking points up on screen during a segment? Because we live in such a distracted culture where we can't sit for even five minutes to listen to a segment, the producers of these news shows sum it up in 10 words or less in the bottom third of the screen (just above the 'crawl' section that makes people think they know what's going on in the world because they see a two-line summary of some huge event). For example, here's are some current headlines on FoxNews.com as I write on Friday afternoon (likely very similar to the on-screen points): "Dems reveal 2014 strategy to be smash and grab." "Under attack on all sides, Obama Democrats return to ramming speed." "Cost of offering health care might make some small businesses opt for fine." Three headlines, all painting democrats with a negative spin: they engage in smash and grab and ramming and their policies hurt business. What other takeaways can you get if you have the attention span of a moth? These expression are never overtly slanted...but the way they use words (and they are experts at this, I'll give them that) can shape the opinions their viewer form in very subtle ways.
-2. What kind of pictures do they put up of liberals? I've noticed this a lot more lately in social media and elsewhere. You can change perception by still pictures without even having to resort to photoshop. Most of the time when Fox News uses still images, Obama looks like he's about ready to puke, Hillary Clinton looks like a shrew, and Harry Reid looks like a wimp. No strong, positive pictures are available, I assume.
-3. At any given time, what are the other networks talking about? Here's a fun game (for sadists): at any given time, compare what CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News are talking about. What they talk about during their 'in-depth' segments tell you about the narrative that they are trying to push. Today most channels are talking about the 50th anniversary of the JFK assassination. But as I was working out today the guy next to me who was watching Fox News on his machine was paying attention to the ways democrats are changing filibuster rules (unfair!) and more on the failures of Obamacare (incompetence!). Tell somebody in so many ways so many times and people will believe that this is the only way to tell the story.
-4. Who are the representative opponents who allow them to say see, we are fair and balanced because we let them talk? Yes, Fox News occasionally have liberals, but usually it's just a beaten-down Alan Colmes . Ever see a lumberjack match on pro wrestling, in which one guy is technically facing only one other guy but has a ton of people outside the ring knocking them around as well? That's what Fox News must be like for a liberal. In addition, most of the representative liberals I've noticed on there are not well-spoken; it's like they have taken the time to find the cheapest talking heads they can. Put them up against an expert from your side, and of course it will seem like that one point of view is markedly better. It's like comparing the Red Sox with the Wichita Wingnuts: don't be surprised if the Wingnuts aren't going to win a lot of games in a head-to-head competition.
The reality is that most people don't want to believe that their favorite point of view is a product of bias. We don't listen to what others have to say, and with the fractured 'narrowcasting' of news programs this separation only gets larger. But the first step of healing is the acknowledgment of the problem.
