You don’t need citations from me to know bias in news coverage is all the rage these days. But there is precious little discussion of what is meant by “bias,” other than the speaker knowing it when they see it.
Here’s my example of morally blind (biased) news reporting or the lack thereof:
“Yanjun Xu, a high-ranking director in China’s Ministry of State Security (MSS), the country’s counter-intelligence and foreign intelligence agency…” was arrested for alleged economic espionage and attempts to steal trade secrets in the United States.
You will see much hand wringing and protests of how necessary such a step was to protect American companies and their trade secrets. Add in a dash of prejudice against China and indignation that a nation of thieves (the U.S.) should be stolen from by others and you complete the scene.
When you find stories about Yanjun Xu, check the same sources for reporting on U.S. responsibility for 32 million Muslim dead since 9/11.
In any moral calculus worthy of the name “moral,” surely the deaths of millions are more important than the intellectual property rights of U.S. industries. Yes?
The value U.S. news organizations place on Muslim deaths versus theft of trade secrets is made self-evident by their reporting.
I don’t want to re-live the 1960’s where people dying were a daily staple of the evening news (even then it was almost always Americans). However, fair and balanced reporting does not exist when millions perish without every man, woman and child being made aware of it on a daily basis. Along with the lack of even a flimsy excuse for their murders.
The U.S. media can start by televising the nearly daily murder of protesters in Gaza and work their way out from there. Close-ups, talk to families, bring the cruelty the U.S. is financing into our living rooms. Sicken us with our own inhumanity.
PS: Don’t bother commenting the media lacks access, permission, etc. If you want to be butt-puppets of government, say so, don’t sully the title reporter.