Journalistic bias in the absence of information | The Middle East

The reason for my return to the topic of journalistic accuracy in the use of specific expressions relevant to our time and future for researchers and academics to refer to in the archives is the coincidence of the season of celebrations and artistic, cultural and cinematic festivals, with the intensification of controversy over expressions used by television networks to cover the divisive protests, between supporters and opponents of the Supreme Court’s decision to (Misleading journalistic expression of text indicating unconstitutionality) a decision she made in 1969 has in favor of a young woman against the state of Texas, whose laws prohibit abortion without medical reasons.
The 1969 ruling set a “legal precedent” that empowered centers that provide this service to women with federal funding (outside the state) and suspended local laws (adopted by their elected legislators, while federal laws are enacted by Congress legislation) ), while last month’s ruling on -instituted state laws criminalizing gym abortion. Active streams choose names that reflect the philosophy that rejects abortion (such as religious, moral, or medical), the best known of which (which includes doctors and nurses) is called the “pro-life movement” based on biomedical information about the formation of the fetus and sensing aspects of life (such as heartbeat) with medical devices such as stereotaxic waves the sound.
The left-wing currents objected to broadcasters using the phrase “life support”, quoting the protesters’ banners, and the group’s official name as described by the movement’s spokesman.
Left-wing platforms such as the BBC acknowledge their lack of neutrality on issues such as heat, anti-racism and the feminist movement, and their editorial guidelines urge broadcasters to replace “life support” with “anti-choice” or “anti-choice” expressions. to appease feminists.
A statistic (conducted by the Press Gazette, the press profession’s publication since 1965), on the use of the term “life support” in newspapers and national networks’ coverage of abortion controversy for a year, found that most of them were 75 times in the “Daily Mail” (the most read newspaper among women Britain), followed by the conservative “Daily Telegraph” eighteen times, the “Times” fourteen times, and the least is the “Guardian” and the “BBC” website, once for both.
From half a century of experience in journalism, I have discovered that the most impartial method, and the most influential method of transforming public opinion in the long run, is selectivity, with the deliberate disregard of basic facts. It is also a lifeline for the press (which turns news coverage into a campaign to change the direction of public opinion). Left-wing newspapers are negative towards Britain and European capitalist industries, while not mentioning China when tackling the industry’s environmental pollution. The effect lies in the subconscious of the recipient by ignoring the information that what China builds monthly from power plants and industries with polluting fuel to the environment is more than double the energy that the whole of Britain uses in a whole year, and if you search in the newspaper’s archive you will not find a mention of it; If the matter is raised in a specialized symposium, the left justifies “the temporary forgiveness of China” so that they catch up with the industrial revolution, which he missed by two hundred years “because of European colonialism.” The discussion of the symposium is not published. in its entirety.
In covering the split over the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling, all of the networks you see in Britain, (about a tenth) are not impartial, but support “women’s right to vote” and reason for their assessment that there “more conservatives than Democrats on the court”; Only one television network (GB News, which is the financially poorest), was more comprehensive in its coverage of angles overlooked by the larger networks. The networks, for example, did not mention that one of the reasons for the court’s re-examination of abortion laws is the scientific evidence: the capabilities of medical devices to monitor and shape fetuses today are generations ahead of their peers in 1969. In addition to advancing more than half a century in the technology of nurseries to care for and raise the premature baby. Years ago, the critical limit was about thirty weeks. The program discussed a female doctor (from the life support campaign) who reported cases of abnormal births and the shortest gestation period was less than twenty-one weeks, which is four weeks less than the current abortion law allows.
The doctor, like many others, is not against abortion, but she rejects the politicization of health and wants to keep the issue “medical care” with the aim of the mother’s physical and psychological safety, and what are the ways and opportunities for ‘ a healthy and a healthy fetus to complete. To call it, therefore, an opposition to “women’s freedom of choice”, as the left-wing press describes it, is a mistake. The most accurate journalism is “life support” because, as a doctor, she preserves the life of the mother, the fetus and everyone who encounters her in her profession.
I was also amazed at the ratings of commentators at cultural festivals, such as the famous Glastonbury Festival of Music and Performing Arts in the West of England, and the artists’ condemnations in protest of the US court’s decision, which prompted some journalists to years ago, described as “specially produced” in solidarity with the victims of the right-wing court, as well as The press coverage of film festivals that screened films, for example by directors of Egyptian or Iranian origin, representing countries such as Sweden that were funded. and produced by its cultural institutions. » The journalist misleads his readers.
Inaccuracies were repeated in the press coverage of literary and cultural festivals. For example, no one uses the term “European literature.” There is French literature, German theater or Spanish literature. Even for texts in a common language like English, you can find “English” literature other than “American” theater; Why did newspapers refer to “Afrikaans literature”, while works in French, English, Portuguese, Spanish and Afrikaans (the language of South Africa developed from Dutch), are in national languages ​​with Latin or Arabic texts and letters, so the definition here is a racist geographical, and more precisely Berber literature, or “Egyptian literature” or “Nigerian” or “Moroccan literature”; I do not know what is worse, the racist colonial view of journalists’ insensitivity, or ignorance and mental laziness?

Leave a Comment