Virtually Classless---Examples of Structural Bias in the Meeeeedia

In The Problem of the Media Robert McChesney identifies three areas of inherent bias in the news media:

1--The reliance on official sources

2--The lack of context and contextualization (ie, the "big picture")

3--The covert corporate bias--dig here, not there, dig this, not that.

McChesney writes that journalists cover every thing a politician or official source says and does and makes that the news. Sending writers to quote leaders originally kept the newspapers from taking flak from the readership and it "is a crucial factor in explaining why the coverage of the U.S. presidency has grown dramatically...reporters are assigned to the White House and they file stories regularly, regardless of what is taking place" (69).

An example here is a speech in which W reiterated his stance that the US will stay in Iraq for some time to come. This is not and shouldn't have been treated as breaking news, since it's obvious based on every speech he's made in months that the US will stay there. Even the article goes on to discuss the image problem facing Bush. Reading between the lines, the article is more about Bush making a speech than the content of the speech. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/24/AR2005082401454.html

The fact is, the news is that Bush spoke, not really what he had to say. This, McChesney would argue, is part of the problem--the news covers leaders' meetings, speeches, lunches and dinners, without really discerning which actually directly impacts the country and its residents. Politicians, like everyone, talk a lot--but that doesn't mean everything they say is "news."

As far as his argument on the lack of contextualization, there are exceptions; however it seems that too often the larger picture is accomplished only through columns like this http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/16/politics/16assess.html?hp&ex=1126929600&en=a4c523ffedd97d22&ei=5094&partner=homepage, and not through regular news articles. McChesney takes issue with the fact that you have to go to a story called "news analysis" to see the "big picture."

The corporate bias cannot be fully explored in a link or two, but this Business Week smattering concerns four major corporations and their losses in Katrina without a single mention of the common man's losses, or damage done to neighborhoods, or school systems. http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D8CK83TO4.htm?campaign_id=apn_home_down&chan=db

Still, I would have to disagree with much of what McChesney says in this argument, because America is a corporate nation, newspapers are owned by companies, and the average person will identify and understand an article on Wal-Mart than one on a local issue of welfare across the country. That said, his book does not discuss the issue of Enron/Kenneth Lay etc., and even he would have to admit that coverage of companies like Halliburton has been largely critical. I suppose he hates the idea that the only time corporations are dealt with in the news is when they make news for being in trouble.