Coverage Discrepancies
In light in the unfolding events occurring in Afghanistan, the unfortunate fact of differing news coverage from competing outlets shows again. The coverage or lack thereof on certain details is both predicable and damaging to public opinion and discourse. Mentioned in an editorial by Tom Jones in Poynter, the constant need to point a finger to one particular person or event is not only misleading, but overall oversimplifies a several decades-old problem. While there is blame to go around, centering media coverage on political digs and "gotcha" moments makes for better entertainment than news.
While I understand how difficult writing unbiased news and posts can be, the framing and specific language used around sensitive topics concerning topics like the Middle East and the Taliban must be very intentional. What I like about Jones' article is the many sources and examples he used surrounding news articles. He writes about the good, bad and ugly aspects of this media coverage by various news outlets. He elaborates on those he felt like did a good job in covering Afghanistan and those that did not do such a good job, and why that is in the section subtitled "So what did work in coverage?". In the end it is clear how vital it is that news sources do their best in reporting the facts in a way that allows others to make their own opinions, rather than supply the public with an outlet's opinions.
https://www.poynter.org/newsletters/2021/the-good-bad-and-ugly-of-the-media-coverage-of-afghanistan/
Lately it has seemed as though the news is a free for all, more concerned about views than accurate news reporting. I also believe that having access to unbiased, fair news it crucial today when there is so much misinformation and fake news being spread. I enjoyed Jones' point of view in his article. He said that the audience should focus on what happened, not who to blame. I think that is a smart way to go about consuming news media. I really enjoyed your post!
ReplyDelete