The dominant media used to be able to present non-partisan political information. These are called facts by the viewing, reading public. This type of information is designed to present knowledge about the issues being discussed so that the receivers of this can process it into a rational decision. That is not happening any more as the media has made their bed, so to speak, with one side of each debate.
Making it even harder to find is part of the reason for the fourth estate. News coverage rarely, if ever now, present the facts that will put their selected politicians in a bad light. What the party says, the media repeats. There is no investigative desire anymore.
Even on the Internet, there is trouble finding this type of factual information. Some websites or blogs will suggest they offer balanced coverage. They will often be fairly straight forward, however, the larger portion of them have some ax to grind as far as which side they are rooting for. There are a few tests that can be conducted to determine the objectivity or truthfulness of these and other sources of data.
A very good way to determine whether any presentation is non partisan or not is to read or listen with an open mind. If the piece is an exercise in emotion, harsh rhetoric and or an appeal to do something, right now, it is not a recitation of factual data. Since nonpartisan information does not necessarily assist either side in an issue, each side should offer it.
In most of the debates about gun control issues, nonpartisan information is missing to a large degree. It is very hard to find politicians who will stand up for the second amendment and harder yet to find those willing to present anything other than there are too many guns out there. Everyone on this debate seems to have forgotten what the second amendment says about the right to keep and bear arms and not being infringed upon.
The facts that are rarely, if ever, published tend to show the difference between law abiding gun owners and what happens in the many shootings the media report on. Gun restriction laws do not curb crime as the harshest laws are in cities with the highest crime rates. Mental health issues are only marginally mentioned and nothing is proposed in the legislative items that purport to be fixes for this touchy problem.
One of the very reasons that the factual information is not found in the media is that they have their own agenda of distorting them. Their partners in legislative branches, around the country, need this cover as they grab the emotional strings of doing something now. The press wants their people to succeed and do not find it an unworthy mission to help them.
A place where non-partisan political information should be on display is in political debates. Not so fast, as the media is moderating the vast majority of them and everyone knows their bias. One side will actually be helped by the moderator and the other side will not know what hit them. The side out of favor with the media will not get balanced coverage. The other side will gain all of the headlines and nothing will be known, again, about what needed to be said.
Making it even harder to find is part of the reason for the fourth estate. News coverage rarely, if ever now, present the facts that will put their selected politicians in a bad light. What the party says, the media repeats. There is no investigative desire anymore.
Even on the Internet, there is trouble finding this type of factual information. Some websites or blogs will suggest they offer balanced coverage. They will often be fairly straight forward, however, the larger portion of them have some ax to grind as far as which side they are rooting for. There are a few tests that can be conducted to determine the objectivity or truthfulness of these and other sources of data.
A very good way to determine whether any presentation is non partisan or not is to read or listen with an open mind. If the piece is an exercise in emotion, harsh rhetoric and or an appeal to do something, right now, it is not a recitation of factual data. Since nonpartisan information does not necessarily assist either side in an issue, each side should offer it.
In most of the debates about gun control issues, nonpartisan information is missing to a large degree. It is very hard to find politicians who will stand up for the second amendment and harder yet to find those willing to present anything other than there are too many guns out there. Everyone on this debate seems to have forgotten what the second amendment says about the right to keep and bear arms and not being infringed upon.
The facts that are rarely, if ever, published tend to show the difference between law abiding gun owners and what happens in the many shootings the media report on. Gun restriction laws do not curb crime as the harshest laws are in cities with the highest crime rates. Mental health issues are only marginally mentioned and nothing is proposed in the legislative items that purport to be fixes for this touchy problem.
One of the very reasons that the factual information is not found in the media is that they have their own agenda of distorting them. Their partners in legislative branches, around the country, need this cover as they grab the emotional strings of doing something now. The press wants their people to succeed and do not find it an unworthy mission to help them.
A place where non-partisan political information should be on display is in political debates. Not so fast, as the media is moderating the vast majority of them and everyone knows their bias. One side will actually be helped by the moderator and the other side will not know what hit them. The side out of favor with the media will not get balanced coverage. The other side will gain all of the headlines and nothing will be known, again, about what needed to be said.
No comments:
Post a Comment