It is a universal understanding that knowledge is power.  Knowledge unlocks the doors to comprehension, creating opinions, and even gaining new opportunities.  Education is truly one of the most valuable acquisitions a person can obtain throughout their lifetime.  If people learn incorrect information or skills, their education is useless and can be harmful to their fellow members of society.  Most people feel an obligation to keep track of current events whether that be on a worldwide scale or an individual scale.  The media provides the vast majority of individuals with their news content.  Most Americans flip on their go-to networks such as MSNBC, Fox News, and CNN.  Americans count on their news providers to supply them with current and factual stories that are relevant to their lives.  When stories cross the border between fact and opinion, it starts to become an issue.  Today’s media contains bias that aims at persuading the viewer to think a certain way.  Media bias is real and occurs in most of the major news networks; it does have effects on society as a whole because it changes the reality of events causing a distorted view of the world.

How do we really know what is occurring in the world on a day to day basis?  We rely on the media to inform the world of the latest tragedies, celebrity divorces, governmental changes, and miraculous events.  Modern day technology allows stories to be spread across the globe within seconds.  Many incredible stories do not receive the recognition they deserve.  Major news networks and platforms hold such power because they decide the stories to be shared with millions and the stories to be thrown out.  The media decides what is important and where people should invest their feelings.  This can serve as a positive and negative effect within society.  After tragedy strikes, the media uses their voice to call for aid and to petition society to come together in solidarity to support fellow citizens in their hour of need.  In other cases, media can be used negatively to persuade the masses of certain ideas.  The Nazis used propaganda to convince the population that Jews should be sent away, and the concentration camps were not as terrible as they actually were.  Today, we do not experience media bias on this level; however, the bias we do experience can make us perceive events differently from how they really are simply based on the under or over exaggeration of the media.

It is not difficult for the average person to identify media bias while watching a news program, reading a newspaper, or listening to a talk show.  One can recognize when a news anchor or host uses words that have positive or negative connotations to describe an event, place, or person; however, it is difficult to measure how biased certain news networks are.  Tim Groseclose and Jeff Milyo conducted a study that aimed to determine the amount of bias used by the media.  They state “to compute our measure, we count the times that a media outlet cites various think tanks.  We compare this with the times that members of Congress cite the same think tanks in their speeches on the floor of the House and Senate.  By comparing the citation patterns we can construct an ADA score for each media outlet” (Groseclose and Milyo 1193). Groseclose and Milyo are able determine how biased a network is by monitoring how many times they reference think tanks that align themselves with a certain party.  Their “results show a very significant liberal bias. All of the news outlets except Fox News’ Special Report received a score to the left of the average member of Congress” (Groseclose and Milyo 1193).  This not only shows that networks are biased, but also that there are more liberally biased networks than conservatively biased networks. 

The 2016 election may be remembered for many reasons; one of the main reasons being the media involvement.  If you questioned people on which candidate was more likely to win, the majority of those people would agree that Hillary Clinton was poised to become president.  After learning of Donald Trump’s victory, people were shocked and questioned how the nation could have been so wrong in its predictions.  John Sides interviewed analysts who performed a study to try to determine whether the media favored Trump or Clinton.  By using a computer program, they searched for adjectives in over 20,000 articles (Sides).  Then they rated the positivity and negativity of the adjectives on a scale; these were the compiled to create a graph that showed the media’s opinions over time (Sides).  While the media was more dismissive to Trump, it was evident that both Trump and Clinton were hit negatively by the media after controversial revelations (Sides).  Networks aligned with certain political beliefs were throwing accusations at both candidates to try to gain favor for their own candidate.  In the compiled articles, which were pooled from networks that varied in liberal and conservative bias, Trump was mentioned a lot more than Clinton.  The media was portraying Trump as vulgar and unfit to hold office and be a part of the nation’s government.  They made everyone believe that he had no chance at winning.  

Liberal media wanted to show the world that Trump was a lost cause, and it was not worth voting for him because he did not stand a chance against Clinton.  Clinton’s campaign also took a hit as her “email scandal” was plastered on every magazine, seen on news channels, and discussed on radio shows.  The conservative media wanted the public to believe that Hillary Clinton was not trustworthy and that she was corrupt.  Although we cannot say for certain that the deciding factor for the election was due to the media’s influence, we can definitely say that the media affected this election by swaying the beliefs of voters.  Bias occurs with conservative networks such as Fox News, and it occurs with liberal networks such as NBC and CNN.  Media bias is not just a ploy to make you vote a certain way; media bias makes you think differently about events.  This evidence clearly shows that the bias occurs both ways.

Many people question whether media bias actually affects voters.  Stefano DellaVigna and Ethan Kaplan performed a study to determine of media bias has this influence.  To conduct their research, they “employ a difference-in-difference methodology and compare changes in the Republican vote share for towns where Fox News was introduced before the 2000 elections to towns where it was not present by 2000” (DellaVigna and Kaplan 1189).  This allows them to be able to see the exact effect of Fox News’ conservative slant.  DellaVigna and Kaplan’s “main result is that Fox News had a significant impact on the 2000 elections. The entry of Fox News increased the Republican vote share in presidential elections by 0.4 to 0.7 percentage points” (DellaVigna and Kaplan 1190).  This evidence proves that media bias has an effect on people and is meant to persuade voters to align their political beliefs with the media.  DellaVigna and Kaplan also looked at senate races “where Fox News did not cover the candidates directly” (DellaVigna and Kaplan 1191).  They found that “Fox News significantly increased the Republican vote share for Senate by 0.8 percentage points” (DellaVigna and Kaplan 1191). This is very significant because Fox News did not cover the individuals running for Senate, yet their votes increased.  This shows that Fox News was able to increase Republican votes for the Senate by just sharing general conservative ideologies.  Fox News was able to use their conservative slant to sway opinions and increase the Republican vote.

Another important study conducted by Jonathan Morris also shows that Fox News makes people believe that other networks are very liberally biased. Morris “analyzed data on television news gathering habits and political attitudes collected from surveys” (Morris 707).  This allows him to understand where political slants lie among the media, and he also looks at the news networks that attract the most viewers.  He found that “Fox News Channel has been the main beneficiary of television news-fragmentation by appealing to those individuals who have become disillusioned with what they perceive as a liberally-biased mainstream media” (Morris 707).  This means that Fox News preys upon people who believe that the media is liberally biased by giving them conservatively biased news.  He also found that “the Fox News audience has a distinct set of political attitudes regarding President Bush and his opposition” (Morris 707).  The viewers generally align themselves with the Republican party.  Lastly Morris identified “that Fox News watchers have perceptions of political reality that differ from the rest of the television news audience” (Morris 707).  Media bias creates a divide between political parties as viewers want to believe the news that aligns with their own political loyalties.  This affects our population because people will continue to listen to their respective news sources.  The biased media’s agenda is ultimately to persuade people to align themselves with a certain political party. 

The media should not be allowed to spin stories to benefit their agenda because it takes away from the integrity of the media and detracts from the trust people give the media.  A large issue facing the media is that over half of North America feels they cannot trust the news to provide accurate information (Christie).  People should be wary of bias in the media because the issues the news covers are very serious and important topics, so you do not someone to be embellishing the facts.  She suggests that it is not a question of trusting the news; it is a question of whether a viewer can consume it wisely (Christie).  If a viewer acknowledges that there is media bias and is able to identify when that is occurring, they can protect themselves from developing misperceptions.  When the media tweaks a story by associating words with a negative or positive connotation to it, they are letting the viewers know how they feel about it.   The media holds more power than anyone realizes because they have a voice and an audience.  Although people may not agree with what they have to say, their words can still have an effect on people. 

The media tweaks their stories to serve their own agendas.  While this mostly occurs within the spectrum of politics, media can also favor companies that sponsor or fund them.  The media is able to make a profit by airing commercials, including advertisements, et cetera.  Ralf Dewenter and Ulrich Heimeshoff conduct a study that “investigates the existence of a possible media bias by analyzing the impact of automobile reviews in a leading German car magazine” (Dewenter and Heimeshoff, 77).  The media’s content can also favor the companies who give them checks to publicize their products.  These advertisers want to sell their products, so they market to the audiences of the media in which they advertise (Dewenter and Heimeshoff, 78).  Based on the type of media an advertiser is using, they are able to identify how to make the viewer want their product.  For example, a company advertising for their mascara product in Cosmopolitan Magazine is going show that their product makes you look beautiful and feel beautiful on the inside.  This company would not advertise in Men’s Health Magazine, as this market is not interested in their product.  Having an advertisement in a newspaper is not bias; the bias comes with reviewing the product.  This can be compared to the super skinny super models on Instagram telling you to buy this product because it will give you a flat stomach.  These people are payed to tell you whatever you need to hear to buy their product.  Magazines can write reviews that favor certain companies’ products.  This hurts consumers because they are purchasing products that are not necessarily the best.

It is not uncommon to see two different takes on stories in the media, especially as we look at history.  Yi Xiang and Miklos Sarvary investigate these instances.  They report on a “case in the context of the Iraqi war, comparing reports on the same event by Fox News, The New York Times, and Al Jazeera.  A common feature among these alternative reports is that while they are factually correct, they convey very different messages and stimulate radically different impressions about the events” (Xiang and Sarvary 611).  By having two different accounts of a story, the media creates confusion among people.  They do not know which information is correct.  This bias “is achieved by selective omissions and differing emphasis” (Xiang and Sarvary 611).  Omission and emphasis can completely change what a person takes away from a news story.  Omission can allow the media to leave out parts of a story that may hinder their agenda.  A network can put emphasis on certain parts of a story to further their agenda as well; by putting emphasis on a part of a story, they let the reader know that it is the most important idea and they want the viewer or reader or listener to share their feelings.  People want their views and opinions to be the correct ones, so many people often watch news that caters to their own personal beliefs. 

An issue with media bias that researchers have been studying is the hostile media phenomenon.  When conducting a study, Vallone, Ross, and Lepper, found that “each group readily assimilated or accepted at face value the evidence that seemed to support its position” (Valone et al 577).  Media bias affects the public because people are more likely to acknowledge information that confirms their own views.  They will not consider other news sources’ opinions because they want their own information to be correct.  The hostile media phenomenon suggests that “partisans frequently claim to perceive hostile bias, even in news coverage that most nonpartisans find even handed and objective” (Vallone et al 578).  This idea shows that media bias causes people to be warier of the media and seek out networks that align with their own political beliefs.  People believe that the media is biased and they apply the notion to all other media that they do not trust.  They believe that there is bias in networks that tend to remain neutral; this indicates that media bias causes people to distort the reality of the one-sided networks.

Some people fail to acknowledge the reality of media bias while others dismiss its presence completely.  Many will argue that political media bias only occurs towards one party.  In recent years, many media networks have come under fire for having a liberal bias or stance.  Eric Alterman argues against this idea.  Republicans are solely responsible for the idea of liberal bias (Schell).  Large conservative public figures and politicians use the idea of the media containing liberal bias as a ploy to discredit certain information that does not favor their party; he also states that the media ends up overcompensating and removes all bias (Alterman 15).  Alterman believes that “another problem with accusations of liberal bias in the media is definitional” (Alterman 15).  The classification of something being liberal has many standards that can be subjective.  While the beliefs of certain parties may be subjective, media does contain bias that slant to the left and the right.  It is evident to viewers and can even be measure by computer algorithms.  Simply calling it a myth that others created does not contest all of the hard evidence that has been proved.

Media bias does exist and has repercussions on society as people begin to distrust the media.  The hostile media effect is a direct example; some people begin to find bias where others acknowledge the neutrality of the news network.  Bias is used to serve the political or economic agendas of the networks as they attract viewers to listen to their message.  The next time you watch the news, really notice how the anchor talks about the topic.  Pay attention to the words he uses when talking about the topic, and think about whether they have positive or negative connotations.  Look at the anchor’s body language and facial expressions; do they remain open with a light expression on their face or do they close themselves off and knit their eyebrows?  Consider the unnecessary segments that talk about hot buys or which products will make your life easier.  Do you think those products are really that great?  Media bias is not a threat as long as you consider what message the media really wants you to take away.
