In our culture, it has been assumed that newspapers and other forms of print media are the public's best interest at heart, and instead of exploiting the public for commercial purposes, a newspaper is there to provide a kind public good. What is meant is that newspapers are owned by individuals or governed by large corporations. While these entities may be in the business of delivering news, also are in business to make profits. Because the benefits are at stake, sometimes what stories are covered and how they are covered can be affected by the owner or controller of the political or financial interests. This forms a bias toward the news, which unfortunately the public should have the weight of the final. And because the news is generated and organized by human beings, flaws and conflicts in understanding and personal opinions can find their way into the public reads news, thus spreading the bias fit the facts contained within a story . Because the general public does not understand how the newspaper industry, some of these euphemisms and views inclined to be as much a fact that the numbers and quotes used within the story is a fact, really happened. Despite the views and buzzwords are within a fact, the damage was done.Media bias can come in an angle that a new entity decides to take on an important issue, or what they focus on issues of a particular event. Bias is inherent in the decision of "news" because it relies on personal beliefs and other standards has learned, either alone or has been taught from monitoring journalists. In any case, the decision-making process, even if the company is based on journalistic standards and comes from an individual or a group of people who come to this conclusion based on his own and journalism preferences.Media analyst Robert McChesney writes in his book Corporate Media and the Threat to Democracy that age bias more often associated with government involvement with private-owned enterprises at the corporate level. Instead, the public perceives this as "innately democratic and benevolent, and therefore are not subject to political debate" (McChesney p.6). Political and financial interests on the one hand, the bias may be rooted in an editor or editorial staff considered "newsworthy. "The public perception of current events and issues may become contaminated or cheated by place of a story is placed in a paper, which is also a product of personal opinions and prejudices. Also, how do you write a story or what the emphasis is on issues and not highlighted or even mentioned are forms of prejudice, such as the difference in news well.One can be demonstrated when comparing items made by the Chicago Tribune (June 11, 2005) and Chicago Sun-Times (June 12, 2005) on the visit of Mayor Richard Daley to other major metropolitan mayors at the 73rd Annual Conference of Mayors. In the history Tribune staff reporters Gary Washburn and Dan Mihalopoulos decided to write an immediate advantage that exalt the name of aspects of Chicago and its mayor, immediately creating your own positive image even before the news reached substantial inside. "The chief executives of more than 200 cities were converging on Chicago for the annual meeting this weekend of the U.S. Conference of Mayors welcomed by blooming flowers, a pristine lake dotted with sailboats and a man named recently by Time magazine as one of the best mayors in America. "In this, the reporters have already set the tone and told the reader that Daley is a good mayor without even allowing the reader to read further on for the test and reach your own conclusion. Add this driver with the title "Among mayors, Daley king" also tends to over-blown importance of Daley. In reading the story without the lead or the title, tells the story of a man who is surrounded by corruption, which may or may not be part of. It is also doing everything possible to cover the time that other mayors are in town to not allow questions unrelated to the convention to be asked by the press. However, with the title and lead to read as they are, paints a slightly different story of a man who faces adversity and fight for their best against these odds. In essence, Daley is a saint, surrounded by bad, bad men.The Sun-Times had a very different position with the case, choosing to focus more on the news and the real reason why the mayors were there first rather than mainly Daley. The real reason is called the mayors to lobby against a proposal by the Bush administration, which reduced by half of a program for cities that have trusted for 31 years. Chicago could lose up to 48 million dollars according to the story Maudlyne Ihejirika.So while the Tribune story pitting Daley tried to play their achievements against some of the crashes, the Sun-Times decided to go for a more direct, news , fact-based story, which took some liberties with the facts and made no editorial statements.Placement a story can also create a more subliminal sense of bias. By doing a story in a certain part of the press, establishing the notion that material to the rear is less important than the material that was considered appropriate for the front page. In one case, the Tribune, which printed his story a full day before the Sun-Times, put the story on the front page, while the Sun-Times put the story on page eight. Although both stories were of the same event, one can have a major impact on public opinion than the other. As the Tribune put the story of Daley on page one, more people will read it and take the trend expressed in its heart as a perceived event. The Sun-Times article is likely to suffer a fate less because fewer people read past the first pages of the newspaper before moving to the sports section. This, combined with an over-all lack of sensationalism by the reporter means that not only the reader of the Sun-Times less likely to get a biased opinion of the mayor, but also less likely to get even reported crucial information contained in monetary and political history as well.It 's easy to bias due to slip past readers to the voluntary suspension of disbelief, which means that people are so quick to trust the news. McChesney believes that this has something to do with the way our culture has become merged with the media. He believes that there are myths embedded in our culture. These myths are: "The professionalism in journalism is to protect the public interest in control of private media, the Internet and new digital technologies with their billions of possible channels to remove any reason to be concerned about corporate domination of the media that the market is the best possible organization of a media system because it forces the media companies to give the people what they want ... and that the media are not dominated by corporate interests, but instead, have an anti-business liberal or leftist. " (McChesney p.8). While McChesney believes the opposite of the last statement to be true, CBS insider Bernard Goldberg reprinted an article he wrote for the Wall Street Journal in his book, Bias, in which he stated that because as TV presenters Jennings, Dan Rather , Tom Brokaw and Peter, in fact, have a left bias in television news at a major network has suffered in terms of public confidence in the news. "The old argument that the networks and other media elites' have a liberal bias is so blatantly true that almost is not worth discussing further. No, do not sit in the dark corners and plan strategies to whom shall we bow the news. Not have to. It comes naturally to most reporters. "(Goldberg p. 19). Among McChesney and Goldberg, begins to form a larger dynamic in which the bias in television news and newspapers are not reserved for liberals or conservatives. Even in texts in this report, the bias plays an important role in the perception of the whole process of the machine of the media. Goldberg sees the "media elite" who run the CBS as a group of liberals who want to make everything politically correct and dismissed the offending anyone too much. Later, on page 19 of Goldberg even openly declares that the "goal ... Just ... Balanced ", which is equivalent to claim what it is without fault and therefore not quite human, like the way Fox News does the same bold statement. It is possible that the border crazy. The above statement could be perceived as a form of bias.Goldberg left, through their observations, not associated with liberal political correctness and therefore conscious consideration of the qualifications and marketing are key elements broadcasting can have a marked effect on how news is covered. McChesney argues that the media organizations of most companies, especially print, are more on the conservative side, but still corporately aware of not rocking the boat and get into political or economic problems and loss of risking your precious readership.In either case, fear of political repercussions and affiliations appear to have greater control over bias in news coverage, either on television or newspaper. In the case of the Chicago Tribune article as compared to the Chicago Sun-Times, while there was no perceived bias by the Sun-Times, there is a definite bias perceived with the Tribune. To show the light most positive aspects of the negatives, the article is almost pro-Daley and therefore does not seem to rock the boat and place the newspaper in political danger. The Sun-Times article on the other hand, although it does not use a negative or overly positive language or focus on Daley, expresses a position on the role that might suggest the position of the newspaper or on the political participation of the Daley administration, which is simply not participate at all. This in itself is a politically motivated and therefore can be conceived as a form of bias. No matter what anyone sees it, the bias is itself in the eye of the beholder. It is always there, but can be viewed differently from the right or left.
