God Save The Local News

I always chuckle when media and ethics are used in the same breath with news, as I am a believer that it is impossible to write without bias. This bias comes directly from your personal feelings which are guided by your experiences and are nearly impossible to quash. Many believe this bias began in the 80’s and 90’s with the creation of 24-hour news channels. Many believe these caused local news stations to adjust their presentations to make them more exciting. I feel that biases have been around since the beginning of our country with Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton both partnering with different local Gazette’s. Both were high ranking affluent members of the government and provided their views of the facts to avid readers, much the same as our media does today. This doesn’t factor in the influence of advertisers, who without them there would be no money in the news. While there are some exceptions to the rule where journalists try and present the facts as honestly as they can, it is impossible to do everywhere due to personal biases, capitalism and consolidation

I am a giant fan of the way hosts like John Oliver present the news, even with his liberal bias. I have always wondered why the conservatives don’t try and due the same, instead trying to bash their point across with condescension. Looking at these factors, the further push toward corporate ownership of local media and the consolidation of outlets presents significant ethical concerns that aren’t being addressed. John Oliver’s critique of Sinclair Broadcast Group’s influence over its local stations offers a clear example of how concentrated media ownership can undermine journalistic integrity. Oliver emphasized how Sinclair stations were mandated to run “must-run” segments, forcing local anchors to read scripts that echoed the company’s views, often under the guise of neutral news (8:40). These segments are slanted to reflect Sinclair’s conservative ideology, even in more liberal cities like LA. A dangerous consequence of this is that viewers tend to trust their local news more than national networks because it’s delivered by familiar faces.

This practice poses serious ethical questions especially looking at how many people trust their local tv news stations. This misplaced faith can be witnessed in the following in the article by Tom Butts “That trust for local television news is seen from both sides of the political aisle with 91% of Democrats and 79% Republicans citing local TV news as their most trusted source”. While we see only one egregious example of this, I believe it happens more frequently. The practice of corporate owners prioritizing their agenda over journalistic fairness limits the range of perspectives that audiences receive. This is particularly harmful to democracy, as Thomas Jefferson said, ‘a well-informed electorate a prerequisite to democracy’.  

Dussel theory centers on the needs and rights of the oppressed majority, rather than serving the interests of a privileged few. This means that the local news media should serve the public’s right to access diverse, accurate, and relevant information, rather than the corporate interests of a few powerful owners. Carlos Holguin exemplifies striving for this in his approach to combat this evil by finding the little stories overlooked by the conglomerates, that matter. He also references positively Kim Kemps blog Red Head Black Belt which reaches a million people and takes a much more honest look at issues

Is there a chance for change? Sure, and pigs can fly. Capitalism, greed and power will prevent any regulatory reform or regulations to prevent further consolidation of media ownership. Furthermore, when you factor in social media, print and even the national news all spouting the same slanted diatribes designed to divide us our chances of removing this cancer further shrink. This means in opposition to Dussel’s liberatory ethics, the interests of the few will continue to dominate, and we will remain unaware in an informational abyss.

1 comment

  1. So much attitude! Of course, you’re right about “bias” or what I’d call perspective in news and, well, everything.
    Reporters can’t help but make subjective choices starting with what issues get covered, what sources get interviewed, what quotes get used from sources, in what order that information lands in a story, etc. I’ve argued (for decades now) that the best journalists are those who are transparent about their biases. I was in favor of running a short bio with my byline. “Deidre Pike is a left-leaning registered independent who believes in an honest, independent media telling the stories of the vast majority. She’s not a fan of using emotional issues like immigration and transgender bathrooms to manipulate voters into supporting the financial gain of billionaires.”
    That would be where I’d start…
    Excellent thinking and writing! Carry on.

    Reply

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *