{"id":13980,"date":"2023-10-01T08:06:16","date_gmt":"2023-10-01T12:06:16","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/intramuralist.com\/?p=13980"},"modified":"2023-10-01T08:06:19","modified_gmt":"2023-10-01T12:06:19","slug":"biased-just-news","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/intramuralist.com\/?p=13980","title":{"rendered":"biased. just news?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Friends, I\u2019m sorry. I think we\u2019ve made a mistake. As we watched a few more news sources fall prey to the skewed idea last week that presenting more than one angle of an issue is no longer necessary nor good (while simultaneously suggesting all reporting on any incumbent being too old to run again immediately cease),<\/em> I think the mistake made is that we sometimes suggest we should be tuning into non-biased sources. That\u2019s not necessarily true.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

That point was brought home for me not via CNN <\/em>nor FOX nor even MSNBC. <\/em>That point rang clunkily true during ESPN\u2019s College GameDay,<\/em> one of my family\u2019s favorite fall pastimes. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

On Saturdays we tend to sit a little longer, take in a game, and pay attention to what\u2019s happening on the college gridiron. Last weekend at day\u2019s end, I noticed top billing\/more attention paid to a few select games. What did they have in common?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In each scenario, at least one team was a member of the SEC, the NCAA\u2019s Southeastern Conference, a notable powerhouse of collegiate athletics. While prominent, what\u2019s also true is that there exist multiple other powerhouses deserving of our attention, such as the Big Ten and ACC (and well, the Big 12 and very-deleted PAC 3 or 4). ESPN just seemed to pay the most attention and be the most excited about the SEC.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There\u2019s nothing wrong with that.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But why would we mention GameDay when speaking of bias?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Great question. Guess who owns the SEC Network.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Yes, ESPN. It benefits ESPN\u2019s bottom line if they report on the SEC in a favorable, more exciting way, so that more viewers tune into their other-owned network. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Friends, let me be clear. It\u2019s ok and even a wise practice to tune into biased sources. Says one of our fave sources in AllSides: \u201c<\/em>Center doesn’t mean better!<\/em><\/strong> A Center media bias rating does not mean the source is neutral, unbiased, or reasonable, just as Left and Right do not necessarily mean the source is extreme, wrong, or unreasonable. A Center bias rating simply means the source or writer rated does not predictably publish content that tilts toward either end of the political spectrum \u2014 conservative or liberal. A media outlet with a Center rating may omit important perspectives, or run individual articles that display bias, while not displaying a predictable bias. Center outlets can be difficult to determine, and there is rarely a perfect Center outlet: some of our outlets rated Center can be better thought of as Center-Left or Center-Right, something we clarify on individual source pages.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

While it may be easy to think that we should only consume media from Center outlets, AllSides believes reading in the Center is not the answer. By reading only Center outlets, we may still encounter bias and omission of important issues and perspectives. For this reason, it is important to consume a balanced news diet across the political spectrum, and to read horizontally across the bias chart.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Balance is more important than bias\u2026 a balanced news diet, a balanced sports diet. It\u2019s thus ok to tune into ESPN; it\u2019s simply wise to know the bias.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Hence, let\u2019s provide an updated chart from AllSides. Are you aware of what you\u2019re watching?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/a><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

We\u2019re in this together, friends.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Let\u2019s be discerning conveyors of news\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Well\u2026 and sports, too.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Respectfully\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n

AR<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Friends, I\u2019m sorry. I think we\u2019ve made a mistake. As we watched a few more news sources fall prey to the skewed idea last week that presenting more than one angle of an issue is no longer necessary nor good (while simultaneously suggesting all reporting on any incumbent being too old to run again immediately … <\/p>\n

Continue reading “biased. just news?”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[4],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-13980","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-current-event"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/intramuralist.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13980","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/intramuralist.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/intramuralist.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/intramuralist.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/intramuralist.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=13980"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/intramuralist.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13980\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":13999,"href":"https:\/\/intramuralist.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13980\/revisions\/13999"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/intramuralist.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=13980"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/intramuralist.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=13980"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/intramuralist.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=13980"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}