This morning, I ran across an article by Farhad Manjoo entitled Why Apple Fans Hate Tech Reporters
I’m really not an Apple or Windows fanboy myself. My wife and my mom use Apple laptops; I run Windows on my laptop, and Linux on my desktops. I prefer Linux because I think it’s satisfactory for most heavy-lifting corporate jobs as well as computers for grandma where needs are limited. But I’m negotiable as far as that goes; for instance, if you’re into computer games, the anemic selection for Linux probably won’t do (thus why my laptop runs Windows at the moment). Just pick the best tool for the job.
I also think the Dewalt 36V cordless tools are the most rugged, longest-lasting cordless power tools you can buy. They are really contractor-quality instruments, and if you do construction for a living you could use just the one battery and have enough power to get a full day of work in without swapping. I also use the batteries from the tool packs for my model airplanes, so this brand of tools is doubly useful to me. These tools are expensive, though, and quite large and heavy. If you are concerned about weight or expense, a different brand or smaller model is probably the best fit for you. As a 6’1″, 230lb male who is used to tossing around 80lb metal boxes full of backup tapes every day, the weight and size don’t bug me and I really like the tools because they won’t poop out on a job. To each his own.
The reason the article was so interesting to me is because I fancy myself a moderate. The way I act, speak, and write are all informed by an overriding thought: what’s the most moderate course?
OK, OK, Timpane, stop laughing!
Anyway, no, OK, so other than one little blind spot surrounding the whole God/religion thing — a bias that, while I try to tone it down, I must acknowledge is present at least a little, teensy bit — I tend to try to choose the most moderate course.
And this is what amazed me about this artle, because Sanjoo was the first writer I’ve seen to address media bias this way. He discussed some research into the issue performed in the aftermath of a 1982 massacre of Palestinian refugees by Christian Lebanese:
The researchers showed the students six news segments… People who were neutral on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict — presumably those from the psych classes — came down somewhere in the middle….Pro-Palestinian viewers said the news clips excused “Israel when they would have blamed some other country”; that the news accounts didn’t focus enough on Israel’s role in the massacre; that the segments would prompt neutral observers to take Israel’s side; and that the journalists who’d put together the stories were probably advocates of Israel. Israel’s supporters, meanwhile, said the exact opposite. … “If I see the world as all black and you see the world as all white and some person comes along and says it’s partially black and partially white, we both are going to be unhappy,” Ross says. “You think there are more facts and better facts on your side than on the other side. The very act of giving them equal weight seems like bias. Like inappropriate evenhandedness.” … Psychologists call this the “hostile media phenomenon”.
The news clips were identical. They were considered by neutral third parties to be objective analysis of the events. Yet partisans on both sides thought the news clips exhibited media bias in favor of the opposing party because they gave both sides of the conflict equal weight.
I think this is a key concept in this age of right and left-wing media pundits claiming media bias. If you think the media is biased, it may say a lot about you, and almost nothing about the objectivity of the media.
I guess since I agree with this, it must mean I have a pro-media bias.