Recognize Bias in a Newspaper Article
When all you want is the facts, navigating the newspaper might be a tricky ordeal. Sometimes bias is the result of laziness, and sometimes it's a deliberate attempt to push a particular point of view. Either way, you should always be on the lookout for bias.
Contents
Steps
General Strategies
- Research the newspaper. Some papers have a reputation for giving a particular slant on the news, in addition to the news itself. But don't assume that views expressed on the editorial pages have any influence on coverage; reputable newspapers strictly separate the news and editorial staffs. Also, take note of how many ads the paper runs (not including inserts which are often added after the fact). If there are large number of printed ads that may indicate a paper is beholden to numerous entities such as special interest groups, local and/or federal governments, corporations etc. for funding.
- Check sites like Wikipedia and Snopes to see if the newspaper is known to have a slant or outright invent stories.
- Take notes as you read the article. Identify "who, what, when, where, why and how" and make a note of any missing information or extra analysis.
- Check the headline. What judgments does the headline want you to make? Are people or groups described positively or negatively?
- Look for interpretation and spin. For example, the headline reading "Hundreds Attend Peaceful Protest" spins a story differently than "Angry Riot Confounds Police."
- Pay attention to the overall tone of the article. Does the feeling it gives you relate to the information given (e.g. murder makes you feel sad) or to the writer's opinion (e.g. a particular political party is scary)?
- Keep in mind that a clear tone doesn't always mean an article is being unfair. For example, if the story covers neo-Nazis, it is reasonable for the article to take a position against crimes such as genocide.
- Watch for buzzwords. These are vaguely-defined terms ("the gay agenda" or "rich Republicans") that are designed or tend to evoke an emotional reaction without giving you any real information. Investigate the article for undefined terms, especially when you come across a word that gives you a very strong feeling.
- Notice how buzzwords are used: they may be taken seriously, or mocked. For example, some people felt that Donald Trump was right to call Hillary Clinton a "nasty woman," while other people made fun of the phrase or used it to discuss sexism. Different sides can use buzzwords in different ways.
- Observe the placement of stories. In a paper newspaper, the stories on the front page are considered most important, while the ones in the back are considered less important. In a digital newspaper, the most important articles will be near the top of the front page or on a sidebar, while the ones considered less important will be harder to find.
- Bigger articles stand out more. Is there a picture on the main page, and how large is it? How much space does the headline (and picture, if any) take up?
- Examine statistics and studies. Where did those statistics and studies come from? Who collected or conducted them? Who funded the research? The best articles will reveal this information.
- Visit the original study. Read the abstract, and perhaps the entire study if you want to know how it was conducted. Do the results match the story that the media is telling? Does the study seem to be conducted well?
- If headlines or charts tout "the worst/best/highest/lowest in X years, do some research. More data might show that if you go back 2 or 3 times "X" years ago, "X years ago" things really weren't so good or bad as the headlines would lead you to believe.
- Check how other articles from different sources report on the story. This can be helpful when you are unsure what is right and what is wrong, or what each side believes.
- Be sure to read both conservative and liberal newspapers. On each issue, do your best to understand each point of view. Are they accurate? Are they overlooking anything?
- Keep in mind that not all perspectives are equally valid. For example, a conspiracy theorist probably has less valid information than a website that offers a meta-analysis of hundreds of studies. Also, keep in mind that even mainstream media can be wrong sometimes.
- Learn to recognize press releases. Corporations and organizations regularly issue press releases to distribute their side of an issue or story to the media. Some media outlets reprint these releases as "news" without doing their homework or any investigative journalism. Press releases tend to follow a predictable formula of 1. Introductory paragraph 2.a single quote from a company executive or spokesperson 3. summary paragraph or "for more information" reference/link. Also common are "MAT" releases which are actually advertisements disguised as "soft" journalism and run by typically smaller-market newspapers. Look for bylines from "News USA," "ARA" or "NAPS"- these are "fake" news.
Examining Coverage of Different Sides
- Look for at least two sides to every story. A good reporter will allocate adequate space in the story to present facts and figures supporting all sides of an issue. Ask yourself if all sides of this argument or dispute would agree that their views were represented fairly? If not, the story may show bias.
- Who gets more quotes? How much space is devoted to voices from one group and the other?
- Consider which side is portrayed as nuanced. If one side has detailed and reflective quotes, and the other side only has a few one-dimensional quotes, it may be that the other side's voice isn't really being heard.
- Whose story gets told? If you're allowed a look into one individual's personal life and emotions, and told nothing about the other side's feelings, the writer may only want you to empathize with one side.
- Who gets the last word?
- Look at how the writer treats the people they are writing about. Make notes of language that gives you a positive or negative feeling about a piece of information, but which represents the writer's opinion, and not a verifiable truth.
- Notice word choice. Is one source "explaining" and "reflecting," while another source is "claiming" and "arguing?"
- Consider double standards and judgments. For example, one person might be described as "passionate and inspired" while another might be described as "mulish and brusque," when both are showing determination.
- Look at whether people on one side protest the claims made about them. For example, Smithsonian Magazine claimed that neurodiversity advocates believe that "autism is not essentially a disability," drawing criticism from many autistic people for misrepresenting their views.
- Ask yourself is something is missing from the article. Is there a source, witness or explanation that has obviously been ignored? Is the "why" unclear? Does the article fail to present the position of one or more parties involved in the story?
- For example, when covering caregiver murders of disabled children, news stories tend to focus on how "difficult" the children were to live with, with quotes from parents or even the killer, but no quotes from disabled people or focus on how difficult it might be to live with caregivers who want you dead.
- Notice if the newspaper wants you to identify with a certain group. One group may be portrayed in relatable terms, while another group is portrayed in extreme ones.
- Be wary if you find yourself being pulled into a particular group as you read the article. By asking you to identify with a group mentality ("regular guys," "working class," "concerned citizens," "mothers," "Christians," "teens," "intelligent people"), the writer may be expecting you to forget to think for yourself.
- Notice if people are portrayed as ordinary or strange. For example, environmentalists could be described as simple "concerned citizens," which encourages you to empathize them, or as "anti-business radicals," which encourages you to discount them.
- This can also be turned around to demonize a group. Something innocuous will have quotes around it so as to appear as something less than mainstream or even deviant. These type of quotes are called "scare quotes". For example, look for terms like "these 'volunteers' often work long hours," or "people are 'encouraged' to contact their friends."
- Consider details told about people's lives. An article that wants readers to relate to someone might talk about their family life, accomplishments, and other humanizing aspects. An article that wants you to dislike someone might focus on their mistakes, criminal record (if any), or belonging to a negatively stereotyped group.
- Consider how people are portrayed through pictures. A photo can make someone look good, bad, noble, sleazy, etc. Ask yourself the following questions: What impression does this photo imply about this person? Could a more objective photo have been used?
Tips
- While evaluating possible bias in an article, it is also useful to evaluate your own motives and personal biases that may influence your reaction to the article. Do you appreciate information that supports your world view and resent information that calls your view into question?
- Remember that human mind has a tendency to over-generalize, and even common sense can sometimes have fallacy in it.
- Mainstream newspapers are mostly credible in what they print but can lean one way or another. They do their homework as they can be sued for false statements.
- Note: This also applies (even more so) to bloggers who are not held to a journalistic code of ethics.
Warnings
- Some articles are meant to be written with bias; take care not to confuse news with reviews.
- Most "rag mags" are pure entertainment and are not credible sources of information.
- If an article is printed or posted by an organization or private interest group, chances are it will be biased.
Related Articles
- Evaluate the Credibility of a Source
- Be a Skeptic
- Think for Yourself
- Understand and Recognize Intolerance and Bias
Sources and Citations
- Student News Daily offers examples of media bias with discussion questions.
