News media has now become the most powerful force in our society, controlling how we think, who we elect and our values as a whole. Alarming as this is, the most disturbing part is the number of people totally unaware of its power and control over us.
You have undoubtedly heard of “Fake News” but did you know about “Biased News”, “Incomplete Facts News”, “Taken Out Of Context News”, “Selective Broadcast News”, “Selective Interview News”, and “Quantitative Broadcast News”? By using these techniques regardless of the facts, reporters can slant any story to be positive or negative, affecting our perception and opinions on any topic or person. Over the past 10 years, slanted news has become so powerful, it is having an effect on justice and freedom of speech, the very foundations of a free society.
As human beings, we can be easily influenced. Evidence exists we are even influenced on a subconscious level which is why these types of slanted news propaganda techniques are so dangerous.
A recent example was on November 10, 2019. CTV National News in Canada, trusted for decades by Canadians to provide them with unbiased headline news from around the world, did anything but, and it wasn’t the first time by far.
The story was on controversial remarks that could be interpreted as racist made by sports commentator Don Cherry. First of all, I am not a fan of Don Cherry but realize when doing live improve broadcasting it’s easy to say something that can be taken out of context. Whether Cherry was trying to get the message out to new Canadian’s about the importance in our society of buying a poppy, or making a racist remark depends on who you talk to. (Cherry later insisted his remarks were not meant to be racist). Either way, any network complaints from offended viewers watching the original broadcast should have been enough to determine Cherry’s fate. What happened in the news media after is much more concerning.
It’s not that CTV National News ran this story, but the fact they spent 3-4 minutes of the 23-minute broadcast on it, out of all the news in the world it was their lead story, and they did the same thing the following 2 days when he was eventually fired because of public complaints. CTV was not the only one to do this, for 3 days on the front page of newspapers, on radio and TV the message “Don Cherry is a racist” was drilled into us. If you still believed his remarks were just taken out of context or the media was overreacting you felt intimidated to speak out in public, effecting your freedom of speech. This silence combined with the deliberate slanting of the story by media made it seem like not only did the entire nation believed Cherry is racist but if you didn’t, you were racist too.
World news media like CTV has the responsibility to prioritize news from all over the world to inform the public on what is happening. They are also responsible to report all the facts unbiased so we can form our own opinions. The fact that one sports announcer of thousands said something that could be considered racist is hardly a national/world news story that deserves more than even a few seconds of air time. Yet in an example of “Selective Broadcast news” and “Quantitive news”, this was the lead story on CTV for 3 days making up 13-20 percent of the entire news broadcast each time. On each of the 3 days, a carefully edited (“Incomplete Facts”) video of Cherry’s remarks was shown. “Selective interviews” comprised of almost all negative public reactions condemning him were also shown. He was even called ignorant by what should have been an unbiased news anchor covering the story. This reckless, relentless coverage was repeated across the country over and over and over again, until finally, public outcry based on their perception through media, ended a career of over 40 years in disgrace (News Media Justice).
With the amount of sensationalism, it’s clear news media has become less about reporting facts and more about competing for viewers. At first, the motive behind slanted news techniques may have been to obtain viewers but with its continuous use, now expanded to political coverage, it’s obvious some people have begun to understand the power and influence it has on us. Unless addressed and corrected soon, slanted news techniques will continue to advance, becoming as complex as our psychology. Manipulation will not be obvious and news that appears to be positive on a topic could be done in a way to trigger a negative reaction. In the case of Don Cherry, how would the people that thought Cherry’s comments were taken out of context and intimidated into silence vote on future political racism issues?
Dave Lister
listerlogic.com
I totally agree with you, and I’ve also witnessed it first hand!
I used to work for a Federal MP/Cabinet Minister and, I was present for many speeches. I read/heard/saw the stories that that were published by the reporters who were present at the event.
Most of them twisted the facts and/or included personal opinion as facts, which would result in a totally different message being given to the public. It was so bad sometimes, I would just shake my head and wonder how they could get it so wrong!
There was only one reporter of the bunch that wrote her articles on facts and not opinion. We were talking one day, and I told her that we appreciated her honest reporting. She said it’s important to her to report just the facts with no opinion. It allows people to form their own opinions. How true! All reporters should be like her!
For example – The MP would work hard, as they all do, to get grants allocated to the riding for something that was desperately needed in the area. If she was successful, and the grant came through, we would let the media know so they could inform the people in the riding. Some reporters came and others couldn’t be bothered to come to the briefing. Most of them reported that the grant was received, but would then go on to talk about how much money (Tax dollars) the government wastes. That didn’t have anything to do with with this grant! All it did was cast a shadow over the good news that was announced.
Will things change? Most likely not!