Fair and Balanced? Is it possible, or it's just a lie?
Sometime ago, I read an interesting report/article at The 3rd World View on August 18. Apparently, Fox News has sued a comedian for using the phrase "Fair and Balanced" in his upcoming book. Fox has claimed that this phrase is its licensed trademark.
Yes, Fox is claming that it is fair and it is balanced. I don't want to get into the detail as how laughable this is, but it just made me think whether even with the best intention, this is possible at all.
In reporting the events and news, if ethics and professionalism are present, it might be possible to be somehow fair in presenting the true reflection of the events without commenting on them, but how is it possible to be balancedwhile maintaining fairness? A news network such as Fox, has some set policies (at least in short term) and performs around that policy. For example, right or wrong, it decides to support the war, so the reflection of war events on Fox would be based on supporting the war. Then, the question is how could that be balanced? This can even be extended to the CNN. For example, about 25% of the US public were not supporting the US plans to invade Iraq, but only less than 4 percent of the US public opinion was reflected in the interviews at these networks. Now, how could this be called balanced?
Let me admit that even in my insignificant writings, I do not wish and plan to be balanced. I might try, to some extend, present other point of views as well, but even that, I am not sure if I should. In a world, where majority of broadcasting tools are in the hands of some select group with an already set ideas and policies, in a world, where other points of views belonging to those "not as powerful" do not get much chance to be heard, is it fair if I even try to be balanced and give both points of views the same opportunity? May be not. I believe it is true fairness, not to let my limited resources be swallowed by those who already have dominated all the media. Presenting their side of stories, is not only not fair, but it can be a complete unfairness to the underdog. I am, by no means, suggesting that I do not welcome opposite opinions to mine make their voice heard in this blog, after all, my resume is not shiny enough to make me a suitable employee of Fox or CNN.
I don't believe and expect Fox, and CNN for that matter, be balanced at all; first because of their ugly nature, second, because being balanced (in polices) and fair is just a lie; a big lie to which only Fox and CNN type networks are capable of. People have different interests, values, and behaviors, so how is it possible to please every body and still claim to be fair?
I would like to make it clear here, I am not trying to be balanced, and this makes my goal for fairness so much easier. And, I know one thing for sure: I don't care if my comments might anger some people, however I will never lie in what I report and I will never (to my knowledge) report only half of the truth.
Please tell me what do you think?
Yes, Fox is claming that it is fair and it is balanced. I don't want to get into the detail as how laughable this is, but it just made me think whether even with the best intention, this is possible at all.
In reporting the events and news, if ethics and professionalism are present, it might be possible to be somehow fair in presenting the true reflection of the events without commenting on them, but how is it possible to be balancedwhile maintaining fairness? A news network such as Fox, has some set policies (at least in short term) and performs around that policy. For example, right or wrong, it decides to support the war, so the reflection of war events on Fox would be based on supporting the war. Then, the question is how could that be balanced? This can even be extended to the CNN. For example, about 25% of the US public were not supporting the US plans to invade Iraq, but only less than 4 percent of the US public opinion was reflected in the interviews at these networks. Now, how could this be called balanced?
Let me admit that even in my insignificant writings, I do not wish and plan to be balanced. I might try, to some extend, present other point of views as well, but even that, I am not sure if I should. In a world, where majority of broadcasting tools are in the hands of some select group with an already set ideas and policies, in a world, where other points of views belonging to those "not as powerful" do not get much chance to be heard, is it fair if I even try to be balanced and give both points of views the same opportunity? May be not. I believe it is true fairness, not to let my limited resources be swallowed by those who already have dominated all the media. Presenting their side of stories, is not only not fair, but it can be a complete unfairness to the underdog. I am, by no means, suggesting that I do not welcome opposite opinions to mine make their voice heard in this blog, after all, my resume is not shiny enough to make me a suitable employee of Fox or CNN.
I don't believe and expect Fox, and CNN for that matter, be balanced at all; first because of their ugly nature, second, because being balanced (in polices) and fair is just a lie; a big lie to which only Fox and CNN type networks are capable of. People have different interests, values, and behaviors, so how is it possible to please every body and still claim to be fair?
I would like to make it clear here, I am not trying to be balanced, and this makes my goal for fairness so much easier. And, I know one thing for sure: I don't care if my comments might anger some people, however I will never lie in what I report and I will never (to my knowledge) report only half of the truth.
Please tell me what do you think?
posted by Faramin | 11:15 a.m.
<< Home