"In the 1930s, public skepticism about the press’s ability to cover politics fairly was very high. It reached a peak in the spring of 1939 when 61% said newspapers were unfair in their treatment of political news. That’s not much different from the result obtained by the Pew Research Center in 1997 when 67% said news organizations tend to favor one side in their reporting on political and social issues" (Haiman 65).
After reading this section of Haiman's book, I found the above quote to be extremely important in today's 21st century news reporting industry. I bet that each of you know what type of paper your hometown has - liberal or conservative?
It seems to be amazing that politics have been named for particular papers. I also believe that this is not a good thing because if someone is conservative, then they might not buy a paper that is deemed liberal. Fariness is the right thing to do, but it seems that a reporter may interview more conservative politicans than liberal or the other way around.
Why is the paper unfair when reporting politics?
Has the media influenced the way articles are reported?
In 1939, Haiman said that more than half (about 60%) of the surveryed people said the paper was unfair, but in 1997 more than half (about 70%) said that the paper seemed unfair.
Why has this number increased with the new types of technology that we have available to us?
If the paper seems so unfair, then why do people read it? Is it because if one is conservative, then they will buy a conservative paper and if one is liberal, then they will buy a liberal paper?
Click here for the course web page devoted to Haiman.