Comparing how news media headlines and reports on the same story

nursej22, MSN, RN · Feb 8, 2023

Okay, I'll bite. the MSN story quotes an official source, the Orange County Sheriff's Department. The Fox story quotes an anonymous witness who won't be held accountable for their statement.

I hold that the MSN story is more credible than the Fox story. But it likely didn't get as many clicks or shares.

Roitrn · Feb 8, 2023

nursej22 said:

Okay, I'll bite. the MSN story quotes an official source, the Orange County Sheriff's Department. The Fox story quotes an anonymous witness who won't be held accountable for their statement.

I hold that the MSN story is more credible than the Fox story. But it likely didn't get as many clicks or shares.

I agree. However, do you think MSN's headline would have read differently if the race was reversed? Or would have Fox news?

Here is a headline from the Gaurdian. This attack didn't have a witness alleging anything racial was said. Nor were there any hate crime charges only a reference to "what some say is a case of racial profiling". There were not witnesses alleging this was racially motivated at all.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/nov/05/milwaukee-white-man-charged-attack-disabled-black-man

Home Health Columnist / Guide · Feb 8, 2023

Update:

The MSN is a news accumulator --link is to a story from The Independent, a UK based global online news organization. They chose the article header just as Fox chose one with an emotionally charged term "white privilege" used often by their news commentators in the past several weeks.

We've talked about this topic few months ago.

Media Bias chart for it lists left/right/center bias along with factual reporting and reliability; I try to get articles from various sources when I post topics

The Ground's blind spot posts "Stories from one side of the political spectrum or the other that had little to no reporting"

All leads to varied information able to vet sources and well rounded news diet.

Article: What is the purpose of journalism?

Quote

News is that part of communication that keeps us informed of the changing events, issues, and characters in the world outside. Though it may be interesting or even entertaining, the foremost value of news is as a utility to empower the informed.

The purpose of journalism is thus to provide citizens with the information they need to make the best possible decisions about their lives, their communities, their societies, and their governments.

Their The lost meaning of 'objectivity' identifies one of the big issues in online publication I see today:

Quote

One is that the impartial voice employed by many news organizations – that familiar, supposedly neutral style of newswriting – is not a fundamental principle of journalism. Rather, it is an often helpful device news organizations use to highlight that they are trying to produce something obtained by objective methods.

The second implication is that this neutral voice, without a discipline of verification, creates a veneer covering something hollow. Journalists who select sources to express what is really their own point of view, and then use the neutral voice to make it seem objective, are engaged in a form of deception. This damages the credibility of the craft by making it seem unprincipled, dishonest, and biased.

nursej22, MSN, RN · Feb 8, 2023

Roitrn said:

I agree. However, do you think MSN's headline would have read differently if the race was reversed? Or would have Fox news?

Here is a headline from the Gaurdian. This attack didn't have a witness alleging anything racial was said. Nor were there any hate crime charges only a reference to "what some say is a case of racial profiling". There were not witnesses alleging this was racially motivated at all.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/nov/05/milwaukee-white-man-charged-attack-disabled-black-man

On closer study, the MSN article was actually a reprint from another source, The Independent, a UK publication. And the headline from the article, not from your link, makes no mention of race. Frankly, if there was no anonymous quote about white privilege, I don't think Fox would have published that story at all.

toomuchbaloney · Feb 8, 2023

Roitrn said:

There is allot of discussion on news media bias. I thought I would start a topic dedicated to this. I find the best way to gather information of any topic is to read various sources of different political leanings.

To start the conversation, I'll submitt this news story.

A headline from Fox News and one from MDNSBC. Note the different headlines and contents.

https://www.MSN.com/en-gb/news/world/doctor-struck-by-car-while-biking-before-driver-got-out-and-stabbed-him-to-death-police-say/ar-AA175gIR?li=BBoPWjQ

https://www.foxnews.com/us/suspect-accused-stabbing-california-doctor-death-spoke-white-privilege-during-attack-witness-says

I agree with the other response. Why do you think Fox included the unsubstantiated claim about the "white privilege" remark?

Roitrn said:

I agree. However, do you think MSN's headline would have read differently if the race was reversed? Or would have Fox news?

Here is a headline from the Gaurdian. This attack didn't have a witness alleging anything racial was said. Nor were there any hate crime charges only a reference to "what some say is a case of racial profiling". There were not witnesses alleging this was racially motivated at all.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/nov/05/milwaukee-white-man-charged-attack-disabled-black-man

The attack involved a white man physically detaining and choking a black man because of a misguided belief. Are you questioning why the race of the parties were included in the reporting?

The article did explore briefly whether the violence might have been racially connected;

Quote

Many who weighed in on the confrontation before Walczykowski was charged wondered whether Burks might have been more badly hurt – or worse – if the encounter had happened at a time when cellphones weren't ubiquitous.

Some even referred to the US's shameful history of lynchings. According to records maintained by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, at least 4,800 Black people were lynched by racists across the US from 1882 to 1968.

False or unsubstantiated accusations of misdeeds sometimes fueled those murders.

This was violence based upon a false accusation.

Beerman, BSN · Feb 8, 2023

nursej22 said:

Okay, I'll bite. the MSN story quotes an official source, the Orange County Sheriff's Department. The Fox story quotes an anonymous witness who won't be held accountable for their statement.

I hold that the MSN story is more credible than the Fox story. But it likely didn't get as many clicks or shares.

Actually, Fox is quoting a local ABC affiliate report.

Beerman, BSN · Feb 8, 2023

Yes, there is a lot of media bias these days. I'm not sure, however, that this a a very good example of it.

Beerman, BSN · Feb 8, 2023

nursej22 said:

Frankly, if there was no anonymous quote about white privilege, I don't think Fox would have published that story at all.

But, there was a witness that mentioned it, so...

Funny. I remember when so many of you here didn't have a problem with anti-Trump NYT stories that quoted people "familiar with the situation."

toomuchbaloney · Feb 8, 2023

Beerman said:

But, there was a witness that mentioned it, so...

Funny. I remember when so many of you here didn't have a problem with anti-Trump NYT stories that quoted people "familiar with the situation."

Yes... there is apparently a witness who won't give their name or appear on camera and who didn't tell that part of the story to the police. That information is therefore unverified although it's included because some people WILL believe it if they read or hear it from their preferred media. Just like they'll believe that the election was stolen or that schools are trying to groom children for gay something or another or that CRT is about making white children feel guilty.

nursej22, MSN, RN · Feb 8, 2023

Yes, to me, at least, a witness who refuses to be identified is less credible than someone who remains anonymous. Interestingly, many who originally chose anonymity while reporting negative things about the former president, identified themselves later. Trump is famous for seeking retribution on anyone who discredits him.

Roitrn · Feb 8, 2023

This is allot. I just logged in and tapped for time. This might sound silly but in order to properly understand eachothers points, I think we might need to clarify some issues?

Violence. Is believing that they were irregularities in the 2020 election violence?

Was protesting the 2020 election but not engaging in the riot on the capital still violence?

If a Republican believes there were irregularities in the 2020 election, is that violence or inciting violence? What if they say it out loud? There is examples of both party members saying things that can be arguably incitement.

And finally, I know that "what aboutism " is frowned upon, but in this context I think it's relevant. Are democrats free of believing things that are untrue? Or exploiting talking point to get votes?

Is the primary grievance of Baloney that Republicans believe things that are not true and sometimes they say it outloud and that's what's primarily responsible for random people, conservative or otherwise to become angry and agitated?