Open Question: Does contextual objectivity create bias?
In an effort to gain viewers, many television programs and news channels are using what is called contextual objectivity, i.e. presenting facts in a manner that entices people’s interest, to keep them watching, and inflame their passions about the particular subject matter. This started in the Middle East, with the T.V. station, al-Jazeera, taking a cue from the science of quantum physics, as it was used to gain popularity in an area with where several countries have government-sponsored censhorship, and has spread to the USA, with major channels like CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, etc. following suit, albeit incorrectly, by distorting their facts. Contextual objectivity has been criticized as being a sensationalist tactic to put butts in seats, but it goes beyond that, by analyzing peoples’ cultural interests and presenting the information in a manner most pleasing to them, whether the information itself is pleasing or not. It is obvious that the USA has used this method incorrectly, as evidenced by their sound/video byte coverage of the war, the September 11 cover-ups (upon slowing the video of the planes and looking closely, one appears to be flying remotely, something that has been tested on commercial airliners by the US government for years with great success, one of them begins to explode before even hitting the building, the hole looks like the trademark hole left by a missile also developed by the government to fit inside the nose cones of 747’s, the nose cone can be seen popping off of one with tracers of phosphorus nearby in the sky, separate explosions can be seen on multiple levels of the building dozens and hundreds of feet below the plane before wreckage fell to the ground, active thermite, a powerful explosive which can melt reinforced steel whereas jet fuel cannot, as it does not burn hot enough, was found at separate locations around the collapsed buildings, the complete ignorance of the WTC building 7’s apparently unrelated collapse, as not even wreckage hit it, and the fact that every building fell down in a perfect implosion, much like a demolished casino, but the WTC is not the topic), their dismissal of opposing arguments to any topic on such shows as Anderson Cooper 360 (including resorting to belittling governors with cheap shots, when they speak out against the obvious agenda of the right wing), Nancy Grace’s (The annoying, perpetually-scowling, blonde, CourtTV anchor who is now anchor of CNN Headline News’s legal segment) apparent inability to get any statement right, when viewed in retrospect, the 100% lack of coverage when the White House publicly released the statement that there were never weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and that we were never really looking or expecting to find them, because Randy Moss pretended to moon the crowd, as well as the Fox News Channel, in general. Still, when properly employed, without altering facts, such as how al-Jazeera properly employs Contextual Objectivity, do you think that it creates bias by displaying 100% of the facts in a manner most suited to your individual tastes? As I said, if you had read the question and details properly, contextual objectivity does not sanitize or change the facts, but changes how they are presented. The facts stay the same. In an extremely simplified analogy, suppose group X prefers to hear details before the basic facts. That would be 2+3=5 (such as how Yiddish speech has the proclivity for rambling before reaching the point of discussion). Suppose group Y prefers to hear the basic facts before the details (the English way). That would be 5=2+3. At no point would the story, under proper contextual objectivity be reported as 2+2=5.

Open Question: Hurricane Katrina. Why is New Orleans, LA still crying???
I live on the coast of MS. I was in Iraq when Hurrican Katrina struck the Mississippi Coast. Katrina Destroyed towns completely. It leveled the City of GAUTIER. It picked up Multi-Level Casinos and moved them. People’s homes were flooded just as bad if not worse than New Orleans. Yet when Katrina hit all I could get news on was crying of New Orleans. It has been 4 years and the residents of MS have rebuilt and moved on yet I still see people of New Orleans crying over flood waters and pointing the blame finger at any one but themselves for living below sea level.

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

Our Random Articles

More Links