« French Followup | Main | Sowetan F1 Team »
July 15, 2003
Balanced Reporting
In the interests of balanced reporting, I feel obliged to mention that Pete and Jivha have an alternate option on the gun control thing.
While we are on the topic, there is a post here about unbalance in the media. Tim also has a more recent item in the same vein.
There is a real distortion of the truth in the way these things are reported. If you rely on the daily media, you would get the impression that all child-abuse occurs in catholic schools as a result of brothers or priests. Reality is that abuse occurs in many places including the home, school, with relatives and any other place where adults and children mix. Abusers are not all priests or brothers and in fact many are not even catholic (shock! horror!).
Imagine three scenarios, one is an archbishop (catholic or anglican, take your pick) accused of child abuse, the other scenario is a senior public servant who happens to be a protestant or some kind (again, you choose your denomination) and the last is a religious commentator who belong to some non-christian religion (choose: muslim, buddhist, whatever). What will the headlines say? "Catholic (or Anglican) Cleric ....", "Public Servant ....", "Advisor/Journalist/Commentator ...". Why is religion important for the first and not the other two? Why is the employer explicit for the first two and not the third? Where do you draw the line between bias and information?
If you think this is a silly exercise, image the local paper running a headline like: "Baptist Company Director accused of abuse" or "Muslim Consultant behind racist threats", "Buddhist secretary lied to parliment". It just wouldn't happen. Catholics (or Anglicans) makes good targets! Baptists (or Buddhists) on the other hand are a protected species.
A similar problem occurred last year when the gang-rape trial was on. Despite widespread media coverage the race/culture issue was suppressed until right near the end of the sentancing. To be fair, the rapists are convicted and serving terms and they are personally responsible for their actions BUT most rational people would agree that the religion and culture of the boys was at least partially responsible for their attitude and the results of that attititude.
Hmmm. I read that last paragraph and notice that I too am being PC in not mentioned what religion or race. Oh well, I guess you can work that out yourselves....
Posted by Ozguru at July 15, 2003 05:07 PM
