The News in 140 Characters or Less

Conventional American media outlets (newspapers, magazines, TV and radio) historically have strived to report the news objectively. Reporters are trained to leave their opinions out of the stories they file.

“How Newspapers Work,” an entry in the popular “How Stuff Works” website, explains that in newspaper parlance, “separation of church and state” means “there is a line between news and opinion that must not be crossed. To do so strips a newspaper of its most valuable asset -- credibility.” (Read the full section of this excellent resource here: http://people.howstuffworks.com/newspaper3.htm). Not all traditional newspapers embrace these ideas, though. Tabloid newspapers often mix news and opinion on their front pages and throughout their publications. Many Israeli newspapers allow their political or ideological agenda to color their reporting of the news (the news pages of the Hebrew-language Yisrael Hayom, or “Israel Today”, reflects the newspaper’s  staunch support for the policies of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and news reports and headlines in Yediot Aharonot, or “Latest News”, often reflect the agenda of the newspaper’s owners). Even in the U.S., despite the collective best intentions of the American media world, truly “objective” reporting may not be possible.

For background on truth and objectivity in journalism, educators and learners can see:

• An Uneasy Mix of News and Opinion in the New York Times, a good assessment of how online media is changing journalistic traditions.
• A Strict Separation, by Washington Post executive editor.
• The View From Nowhere, on perspective and bias. 
• Are American Journalists from Mars and Europeans from Venus? A blog post by a journalist who has worked in both arenas -- see in particular the section entitled, "Objectivity." 

These ideals are distinctly American. It’s worth noting that European and Israeli media have never made the same claim of separating the news from the editorial (opinion) pages. And despite all of the collective best intentions of the American media world, truly “objective” reporting may not be possible.

Fact or Opinion: Understanding How the Media Report on Events From the Temple Mount

To get a sense of the challenges of “objective” reporting in the Israeli context, look at the following headlines about unrest on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem in September 2015, and click to read the full stories:

• From the New York Times: "UN Calls for Calm, Restraint at Jerusalem's Holiest Site." 
• From Israel’s Yediot Aharonot: "Police brace for Temple Mount violence in wake of restless night."
• From the Palestinian news agency WAFA: "Israel Suppresses Pro-aL-Aqsa Rallies across West Bank."

These three stories represent Israeli, Palestinian, and American media outlets. As such, they provide an ideal opportunity to consider perspective, point of view, or bias. Every media outlet assumes certain things about itself and its readers when it publishes a story; this can be seen in these examples, and readers can assess for themselves whether the driving force is politics, relevance, or something else.

• Is the information that is being reported in the three stories any different? Describe the differences and explain them.
• Do you discern any difference in tone in the three stories? Describe. If yes, try to explain the reasons for the these differences.

What is “The Truth” in News Reporting?

Jon Stewart, who left The Daily Show in August 2015, had a tremendous impact on how we think about “news.”  The Boston Globe had this to say:

Stewart never claimed to be delivering objective truths, in the manner of old-school news anchors; he was ragingly subjective and transparent about his point of view. He was one of us, albeit with extraordinary resources and a pulpit; now, we are all able to be him, to some extent... Stewart’s approach to news — ironic, gleefully impolitic, clip-centric, and ultimately idealistic — has become firmly integrated into our national conversation. On social media, after all, everyone aspires to be a pint-sized Jon Stewart.

• What do you think the author meant when he said that “everyone aspires to be a pint-sized Jon Stewart”?

Popular television personality Stephen Colbert, who hosts The Late Show With Stephen Colbert, coined the term “truthiness” in 2005, to describe the gray area between fact and fiction. Here’s the Urban Dictionary entry for truthiness:

The quality of stating concepts one wishes or believes to be true, rather than the facts. 
-Origin: Stephen Colbert, "The Colbert Report," 2005 

"And that brings us to tonight's word: truthiness. 

"Now I'm sure some of the Word Police, the wordanistas over at Webster's, are gonna say, 'Hey, that's not a word.' Well, anybody who knows me knows that I'm no fan of dictionaries or reference books. They're elitist. Constantly telling us what is or isn't true, or what did or didn't happen. Who's Britannica to tell me the Panama Canal was finished in 1914? If I wanna say it happened in 1941, that's my right. I don't trust books. They're all fact, no heart."

Colbert was getting at something very important: truth is a relative term, and nobody can completely erase personal points of view when reporting the news. Perspective, or bias, can be problematic, but it doesn’t have to be, as long as it’s presented clearly and openly.

While conventional media outlets grapple with how to address longtime standards of objectivity, the world of social media is preoccupied with other challenges. Namely, in a format that encourages people to share their views and opinions, how can consumers figure out what is fact and what is fiction?

Activity

Perhaps the best way to understand the fine line between fact and opinion in news reporting is to ask your learners to work individually or in small groups to gather 3-5 social media posts (Twitter might be ideal, but Facebook will work just as well) that explore a topic they care about. Once they have a set of posts, ask them to analyze the different points of view and perspectives they contain. Ask them to consider questions such as:

• What do the posts have in common with each other?
• What is different about the tone and information contained in the posts? Why do you think the posts framed the issue differently?
• Which post do you find most useful, and why?
• How likely do you think you are to believe a post that comes from someone you don’t know and expresses a view that is different from your own? What might make such a post believable?