with so much development in electronic media in Pakistan. what channels you think are neutral in opinion and not biased against certain groups in government present or past.
media should project view points from both side without twisting much.
even showing only one side of the story is not constructive without looking to other side.
now we have new government in place, has the media started grilling them already or holding back on wait and watch or other reasons?
share your views!
Re: Media: Any neutral?
Couldnt stop laughing yesterday when geo stopped a program and announce a breaking news
............................... and breaking news was Altaf hussain is speaking to some students in Karachi....
with that level breaking news I just switched the channel.
breaking news..... now lawyers are near to Aab para market.......
i think these days media is completely biased towards winning the heart of new comers on govt benches and airing anthems about lawyers which if advertised by them would have costed them millions of dollers for air time.
ARY is already huge links with AAZ and 10 million$ deal with zaradri is an open secret now. i dont think they can every be neutral.
Re: Media: Any neutral?
it is not really media's responsibility to be neutral.
most media outlets I know of have some sort of bias, and that is obvious to consumers of that information. if you dont like the bias, switch to another channel. if nobody is providing the perspective you're looking for, in a capitalist country that probably means that you belong to a small enough group that theres no market for it. tough.
for anyone to suggest that he doesnt have bias is to say he isnt human. reality is always subjective, and it is much better to admit the subjectivity and be open about the perspective coming from X viewpoint, than it is to feign neutrality/unbiasedness and really have an agenda (which one ALWAYS has)
it is not really media's responsibility to be neutral.
oooook.
Re: Media: Any neutral?
what?
give me one prominent US or UK media outlet/newspaper (not reporting agency) that is without a specific bent? BBC... left liberal. CNN/ABC broderist/left, FOX right, NBC left. NYTimes left, WSJ right. Guardian Left, Daily Mail hard right. (substitute democrat/republican/conservative/labour as appropriate) Are all these bad sources?
media is never neutral, regardless of any sloganeering.
Re: Media: Any neutral?
npr.
you tried to present it as a fact that the media's job isn't to be neutral.
news media is SUPPOSED to be neutral. that is the moral, ethical crevice that is the foundation and building block of the responsibility, out of which news media is born. News media's journalists are trained to take no sides, be objective and be factual.
The bipartisan nature of major american news media you have mentioned does not represent what media is supposed to be. I used to be a masters student of journalism, which is why I can vouch for what I say. What is your credibility?
news media is SUPPOSED to be neutral.
As long as people have opinion & the opinions are projected/reported as news it cannot be neutral.
Also, its all about bottom line $$$ & those who own tv channels/newspapers this is what they look at...
BTW, npr is not neural at all. Its very left leaning...
Opinions are thoughts and no one is debating them. News isn't opinion. We aren't talking about biased talk shows based on the outspoken/moronic commentators rants. I am talking about news, which is based on facts, is supposed to be presented in a neutral manner. The largest news sources in teh world like Reuters and AP are fantastic examples.
Re: Media: Any neutral?
alig
I am not a journalism student, merely an observer.
NPR, like someone mentioned, does have a left leaning bias. You say news shouldnt have bias, this is why I excluded bulletin agencies like reuters out of it. Strictly speaking the only purveyors of news are the bulletin agencies, because they are not selective. The moment you editorialize and select what news to present you're introducing some sort of conscious or unconscious bias.
I didnt just give american examples, I gave british examples too. I can give Indian examples, Israeli examples and Australian examples too. It is just a denial of reality that media is neutral and only Pakistan its not. I'll wait for you to cite a single western, english speaking (merely because i only understand english) media/news outlet that doesnt have a bias.
You ask for my credibility, I am a computer science researcher, and a lot of my work deals with information theory. One interesting truth from there is that it is impossible to draw a theory from facts without some bias. A computer couldnt present the news to you without a bias, let alone humans.
Re: Media: Any neutral?
Say what you say. News isn't supposed to be biased. You stated that its not media's responsibility to be neutral, which is a ludicrous statement. Because it IS the responsibility of the media all over the world, is a written credo in every journalism school in the world. Whether if people/associations choose to follow it everytime, is not our discussion.
npr is pretty close to left. I meant to say PBS, actually. There's a reason why Jim Lehrer hosts the presidential debates for example.
Re: Media: Any neutral?
well many media outfits do have some code of ethics and their own agenda. but Pakistani media based on "kuch lo kuch do" ie they have to cover altaf bhai even there is no news it may be his pressure or geo/jang soft cornor or they have to do it to survive in Karachi.
right now media is against musharraf, so sidign with PPP and NS but wait when PPP and NS do something to them and they will trun against them. so its not against the idealogy of one meida outfit but based on day to day personal interest of the group.
ie they are not left or right biased neither they are neutral.
BBC as a state funded media has to represent all sides of the society and in news they dont project opinion of BBC but facts more or less
Re: Media: Any neutral?
^ agree for the most part.
I'd agree about bbc. They are pretty neutral.
Say what you say. News isn't supposed to be biased. You stated that its not media's responsibility to be neutral, which is a ludicrous statement. Because it IS the responsibility of the media all over the world, is a written credo in every journalism school in the world.
Whether if people/associations choose to follow it everytime, is not our discussion.
There is a distinction between media and journalism schools. One teaches journalism in the abstract and the other is the actualisation. One can argue that even telling the truth can be a non-neutral act in the real world if one side is trying to repress the truth.
There is no prominent media in the world which can be regarded as completely neutral and unbiased, whatever credo you attribute to them. You can either say that modern media has shirked its responsibility or that it isnt really one.
[quote]
npr is pretty close to left. I meant to say PBS, actually. There's a reason why Jim Lehrer hosts the presidential debates for example.
[/QUOTE]
PBS too has an alleged left/liberal bias, hence the recent prominent push/demand by republicans to move it right.
At the same time, one can argue that publicly funded media such as PBS shouldnt project any bias too strongly that isnt reflective of public views. however private media should be free to project whatever viewpoint they want to.
Re: Media: Any neutral?
I see what you are saying. But you were originally passing an assumption as fact. My point is simply that it IS the duty for media to be neutral. It is a golden rule of journalism of all mediums in every country in the world. Every major media outlet has that written on their credo, even fox news.
Whether people running the media decide to tilt it a certain way is another thing and is not relevant.
Re: Media: Any neutral?
Neutral media is a very difficult balance to achieve.
State controlled media is often manipulated by the government that pays for it - PTV, for instance, is generally friendly to whatever government is in power. It's too tempting for most governments to resist the urge.
Private media should not even be expected to tell the truth. Private media are simply money-making corporations; their primary responsibility is to their owners and shareholders, not to the general public. They should say whatever is needed to generate the most money. Telling the Truth is not popular with the public, which prefers spin and drama.
The only neutral trustable news services are either those state-funded channels which have organizational structures that keep them free of government interference (BBC, Euronews), or those news agencies that make their income by selling news to other media (Reuters, Associated Press).
My point is simply that it IS the duty for media to be neutral.
What about their duty to their shareholders and owners? Shareholders buy stock for generating good returns, not for the way in which they conduct their business.
A media outlet that loses revenue and ratings by selling straight news rather than biased, dramatic news, has failed its responsibilities to those people who purchase holdings in the company to increase their own wealth.
Re: Media: Any neutral?
it is a lie, whenever media claims to be unbiased/neutral. there is always a bias depending on the mix of its personnel/editors/management, and there must always be one. good news outlet should just aim to provide the truth as they see it, not claim to provide universal truth.
the neutrality of BBC is also questionable maddie. i agree with your points about public vs private media though.
What about their duty to their shareholders and owners? Shareholders buy stock for generating good returns, not for the way in which they conduct their business.
A media outlet that loses revenue and ratings by selling straight news rather than biased, dramatic news, has failed its responsibilities to those people who purchase holdings in the company to increase their own wealth.
What about them? I don't disagree with what you are saying. KI just keep repeating the principle. it IS the duty to of the media to be unbiased and fair, its an official golden rule accepted by every entity.
whether one chooses to follow it or not is not my concern.
Re: Media: Any neutral?
it isnt a rule alig. there are media outlets that admit to and project their agenda/worldviews instead of lying about it like fox.
furthermore there is a difference between "fair" and "neutral". dont fudge the words up, I believe people can be fair but never unbiased.
Re: Media: Any neutral?
Its a rule whether you agree or not. :)