Fake News, Biased Reporting, and the Public…?

We have all heard of the Fake News Stories, whether that the Pope endorsed Trump or some anti-Clinton rubbish.  Most people believe everything they read, which is nothing new.   People are gullible.  That is why there are so many successful scams.

Many of us, however, are just becoming aware of biased reporting on so-called reliable news sites.

For many years I have know the bias of the British Broadcasting Corporation.   I know how they are going to report.   Who they support, who they don’t, and what they want you to think.   Listening to them, for me, who knows the tricks, is not problematic.   For someone who actually thinks the BBC is reliable and credible, they are going to be led into the kind of twisted belief Perfidious Albion is known for.

Fox News in America is arch-conservative.   They mask their racism with politically correct terminology, cage their reports to make it seem all Muslims are suicide bombers, and push their views on a public which thinks it is listening to unbiased actual news reporting.

Other stations are a bit more difficult to unmask; save those you know are published by Daash or a Political Party or a Government.

What the Fake News stories have done is alert the public, at least those with operational brains, that what you read or hear as ‘News’ may not be the truth.

I will never forget the hysteria on the BBC in 2010 which made it seem Jamaica was in the midst of chaos.   The incursion was confined to less than one square mile, and the few events outside of the parameter were no different than the crime we experience every day in the year.

Using my own experience, and having been a listener for many years, I can see the bias and what the BBC wants to prove.

Although they are a legitimate and ‘reliable’ news source, they are just better at obfuscation than other organisations.

When you listen to the News you have to start with; “What is the Political bent of the Owners of this Station?”

Then you begin to classify the stories as those which may be written or reported under the effect of that bent.  For example, if the Station is Anti-XY then all the stories will skewed against XY.   The worst things will be said, and if from a questionable source, the voice will announce the Worst Thing, in a positive tone, but a wavering voice will attach the questionable source, for example;

“Crapon News Reports that; XY WAS FOUND TO BE IN POSSESSION OF PORNOGRAPHY When he was in High School.”

The listener will hear about XY being in possession of Pornography, and might miss it is a story from Crapon News, and that this was when he was a minor.

If the station is in favour of XY the report would not be aired, and if XY was arrested for possession of Pornography fifteen minutes ago;  “There are some reports that it is believe that Mr. XY might have had some connection to some pornographic materials.  The Police are investigating.”

Once you train your ears, (and eyes) to hear and/or read between the words you can get a more balanced view of events.

You must also note that many events are suppressed.   They will be taken up by minor sources, they may be placed on Facebook or Youtube.   It is only when they ‘go viral’ or other nations are making great hay out of these  ‘hidden’ stories, that the local ‘reputable’  news services will report on them.

This is to be understood.

It is so easy to point to other countries and claim they have ‘News Blackouts’ or live behind ‘Iron Curtains’ or that their news is sifted and diluted, and very difficult to appreciate that the same thing exists in First World Nations.