Ever since Artisan Radio told us he has dropped news from his radio station because of its bias I've thought about writing something about biased news, and I can't get the idea out of my head so the only way to make my mind shut up is to speak out. I remember the day Artisan asked about picking a brief newscast under 5-minutes and I did a search to discover that virtually all short newscasts require payment with the only exception being VOA (Voice of America) where their charter places news produced by VOA into the public domain. Some other VOA programs are under copyright because material is used from outside sources, but the newscasts are purely voiced by VOA presenters. Then President Biden proclaims firm U.S. support for a genocidal war and as the official "Voice of America" the VOA can no longer be trusted to deliver balanced coverage of world events, thus deserving the reputation of biased. Right now the way to obtain free unbiased radio news is to choose from among several longer-form programs which present excellent trustworthy coverage, including Amy Goodman's "Democracy Now", Chris Hedges Report, Between the Lines, Counterspin, Intercepted, Talk World, and Aljazzera's excellent 24-hour news service. And there are others. Only problem is that nearly all part 15 stations would prefer to ruminate their grade school memories much removed from world affairs. But it's good for transmitter sales and that's the bottom line hobbywise. Ah! I feel much better now that I've talked about it.
Actually, I've found that VOA, along with the BBC and CBC are probably the best of the bunch when it comes to reporting straight news facts. But that doesn't say much. Even then, there are numerous built-in biases, usually around what facts aren't included, what is repeated ad nauseum and use of terminology (such as the use of terrorist and terrorism). You don't have to outright lie (although lots of media outlets do) to influence.
Usually, the news programming that has biases leaning towards one's own opinions are the ones we gravitate to. Unpleasant truths are, well, just unpleasant.
There's obviously a place for news programming in Part 15 radio. I just want Artisan Radio to be a hub of musical and entertainment culture amidst the wreckage of the real world. I'll leave reality, or at least, what is purported to be reality, to others.
"What is purported to be reality." What a good statement. What may have been real at one time may not be real any more. Reality is ephemeral. Or so I purport.
One thing Carl, by using the terms genocidal war, if you were reporting the news on your station by that statement you would be biased in your reporting as soon as you add your opinion in the reporting just by a word it is now not unbiased. The term terrorists or terrorist group could be biased as that could be an opinion by the news caster so truly unbiased reporting would just report an action by the actual name of the group and not using the word terrorist.
By the way all the news on the wars going on whether Russia Ukraine or Israel and Hamas/Palestinians cannot be taken as an accurate indication of what really is happening as one side claims this and the other says this and the information gets misconstrued along the way.
By the way, any news we would do on our stations would never originate with us as if you or artisan do news on your station you are just getting it from somewhere else(newspaper, TV CNN or whatever other source and rebroadcasting it. Even the sources that Carl mentions like Democracy Now or Between The Lines....Counterspin, by just the terms it would seem to be opinions of someone...especially Counterspin, and not an unbiased account of an event and where do those sources get their information? I am not familiar with those sources mentioned by the way, but are you sure that you are not referencing those news sources just because they report things in a way you agree with? If so that is still biased reporting.
I honestly can't see how news from anywhere is truly unbiased or accurate. Even crime reporting is only as accurate as the people involved that tell the police what happened. And that is subject to an opinion of how one person vs another view the events that happened.
I agree with Artisan. News can be had on commercial stations and TV. We are "supposed" to be an alternative and offer what you can't get on a commercial station and I want mine to be an escape from all the bad stuff and good times, great oldies, listening to mystery dramas and leaving the bad world out of it as I am the main listener. You can change the station for that.
'Reality' today seems to be what is being reported by the various media (print, radio, TV, social). It has virtually nothing to do with the true reality (if there really is one).
I'm constantly reminded of this when I do go out and attempt to wade through all the crap to get to something that resembles truth. Just the act of deciding what to report, and what not to report influences what people decide is reality. Sort of like quantum physics - attempting to observe a particle's location changes that location.
One presidential hopeful gets so much negative media attention that it totally drowns out everything else. There was a debate last night, but you wouldn't know it by reading the top news, even in North America. Some of those alternatives have interesting and important things to say, but few hear them. So all that media attention shapes reality, because it's the only thing people hear.
I mentioned science earlier. Dark matter and dark energy are taken as virtual givens in scientific articles. Yet, the existence of both is mere conjecture (or, in scientific terms, hypothesis - that latter sure sounds better). The terms exist because observations of the universe's expansion (among other things) don't match currently accepted theory, and something had to be invented to explain the differences. There are many other theories, some just as believable as undetectable (despite years of trying) particles, but they are pushed aside by 'consensus' (i.e., general opinion) in the scientific community.
The 'reality' of AI, or Artificial Intelligence, is yet another example. When humans, who are supposed to be intelligent, actually prove themselves so and can demonstrate that they understand intelligence, even in a limited sense, then I'll believe that we can create intelligent machines. Until then, as far as I'm concerned, they're just technological toys.
I see.
Well then, I will discontinue knowing what has been well established, as talking about it marks me as biased according to a panel of moderators.
It leaves me with nothing to add here at this forum.
Carl, I was speaking as someone who has discontinued news on his station, and why. Nothing to do with what you feel has been well established, moderation, or my being a moderator.
We all have our biases and personal viewpoints. I know I do. I thought (and maybe I didn't do it very well) I was just saying that, in the grand scheme of things, I don't think that anything is cut and dry, and I'm not even sure how you would determine if it was. In light of that, I'd rather just entertain, and hopefully in a unique way.
But that's just me. It's differences that make the world go round.
Carl you have it wrong here. Don't get upset. The moderators are also forum members that participate as you and I was just commenting on your post and my point was most news, even just by using certain terms makes it biased, like counterspin, just by name suggests the source is of a certain viewpoint. I don't know what has actually been established or not and no one is knocking you for your opinion. I suggested that the sources you posted are also opinionated and you go to those(and I don't even know what those are) because those sources agree with you..if I am wrong tell me. I will go to this "counterspin" and "between the Lines" and see what you are referring to. Anyways this thread is about news reporting...is it biased or not, and doing news on your station, or not, and this is getting into other stuff and could go down a path outside the scope on the forum so I don't want to continue it. Me I don't do news as if I did I would just get it from another source not my own and I am not interested in doing that. I am about leave the world behind and listen to the songs you grew up with and reviving the golden age of radio You can get news anywhere else.
No need to leave here Carl, no one is attacking you and you are a valuable poster here.
Forum discussions that try to penetrate hot button topics, like "genocidal warfare", easily become obscured in the smoke of semantics. Important to note I do not mean "Semitics", an entirely different thing. Semantics has to do with words; vocabulary. Everyone's ability to communicate is "biased" by their limited mastery of vocabulary (paraphrasing George Orwell).
A handy example is the word "biased", tossed around recently in our exchange about the reliability of radio newscasts. I think "bias" has been referred to as if it is a "thing in itself" but in fact there is a dynamic of bias... there is a range spanning from factual accuracy to a deviance called "bias". A news report can't truly be labeled "biased" unless the critic is aware of the true version of the report. I believe news is often declared "biased" by critics ignorant of detailed facts of the news story.
And a forum site like ours might experience bias from within based on the cultural views, loyalties, and beliefs of the participants and moderators, bringing in the bias of politics, the term "politics" meaning the shaping and tailoring of the forum to fit a projected standard upheld and guarded by the author of a rule or limitation.
One more "word" and I'll go away again... "psychology", the way our minds work in sorting out all the other mechanisms when assembling our standpoint using words like building-blocks forming a wall between us and another.
We're at risk of beating a dead horse here. But I do want to attempt to clarify what I've been saying.
If I could find a totally factual newscast, I would play it on Artisan Radio.
What is a fact? Well, it's the raw detail of what happened. Something like, the President tripped while going on stage. Once you go any further, and start attempting to speculate why, or what that means, you're out of the realm of fact, and into opinion. Opinions form because of already held beliefs, and/or biases, and take you well away from fact.
But we're not done yet. Leaving out facts also can lead to bias. That statement above should have read that the President tripped over a sandbag (I can't remember exactly what it was, but it was something like that) lying on the stage. Important to leave that out if you were attempting to capitalize on highlighting someone's age, and trying to show they were feeble, deliberately or not.
If someone is enumerating facts, and then starts into 'But...' or 'Because' or anything like that, you start to let potential justifications, opinions and other non-factual content in. Whether it's your beliefs, or someone else's, it's certainly not fact. I want to come to my own conclusions, given all the facts. Since it's difficult to have all the facts, you do the best you can with what you have. You also has to be prepared to change your opinions as you become aware of new (or even old) facts.
That's all I'm saying. Every newscast I've listened to has been rife with opinions and short on facts, even those that attempt to do otherwise. Because at the end of the day, pure facts can be dull and boring, and sometimes in short supply. Newscasts have to sell themselves to their audiences, and opinions spice up the show, as well as fill up otherwise dead airspace.
Agree, and newspaper articles and magazine articles are dramatized also to make a story and "stretch" the truth and give readers a lot of the time an inaccurate picture of the what really is or isn't. Things are taken out of context or if a reporter or writer for a paper or magazine interviews someone to get a story it's slanted the way the author wants to project the story and sell newspapers. Example the acid rain dilemma in the eighties where, if you got your information from the news articles it was a gross exaggeration of the real facts as reporters were out to get a story. Unfortunately most people get their news this way. Question is, where do you get news that is just facts, the real truth, with no opinion and dramatization, or slanted a certain way?
@carl-blare CounterSpin was on a station I worked at back years ago. I always liked that program. Definitely shed light on the bias in the news.
@carl-blare That is creepy Carl. Machines replacing people more and more. I think the hammer needs to come down on this AI crap before it gets to far out the bag, probably too late now though. AI has been demoed in commercial radio.
https://www.radioworld.com/news-and-business/headlines/ai-radio-demonstrates-ai-partnership