Public Is Ill Informed On Political Matters Essay

Chun-Fang Chiang and Brian Knight discuss the significance that media bias has on voters in America. They conducted a study in which subjects select a candidate to vote for after reading a biased newspaper article. After the research is conducted, they determine that media is influential in determining who people will vote for, but there are different degrees of influence. For example, people are more willing to be influenced when their source is more credible and when the voters tend to be more moderate.

The purpose of this essay is to explain how the media is biased and in what direction the bias leans towards. For a long time, there has been speculation that there is a liberal bias in the mass media. This is a problem because, “citizens cannot cast informed votes or make knowledgeable decisions on matters of public policy if the information on which they depend is distorted, it is vital to American democracy that television news and other media be fair and unbiased.” [1] Unfortunately, the information we receive in the news, campaigns, and other media are often portrayed to be or look a certain way, either to favor a particular political party, just make it look negative, or scare and the divide the public.

Though the misinterpretation and ignorance of honest news through perceptual bias is formed by individuals, it’s a shame that the remaining three-fourths of bias is deliberately carried out by reporters and journalists themselves. The main issue at hand is that journalists today feel that their own opinions are correct and superior to others; therefore, they are sure to only circulate information that will get citizens to see things their way, as opposed to giving an honest, impartial version of the truth. When asked if today’s media influences the opinions of citizens for better or for worse, Shane McNabb, a fellow news consumer, explains that “media outlets influence people when they have obvious biases. They tell you only what they want you to hear, and often out of context. This is often the case for both liberal and conservative outlets, and people end up either not knowing what to believe or taking on the opinion of the biased outlet”

The media plays huge roles in democracy. To begin with, the media ensures that the public and citizens at large gain access to information which helps to make citizens informed and this in turn helps them to make better choices (Benjamin et al). The media acts in the capacity of an informer by providing citizens with credible information that is not biased and letting them make informed decisions. Democracy holds that the people must be informed. Secondly, the media serves as an eye on the elected members and ensures that they honor the offices that they have been elected in and serve the people that elected them well (Benjamin et al). The media mediates between the people and the governing body and ensures that people participate

Media bias had a big role in the 2016 presidential election. In this world of information, media had a big role transmiting the news and events to a very demanding audience. And the word “bias” was trending throughout the whole election. But, what is media bias? Media is bias when it fails to be fair and objective while reporting. With the idea of a biased media in the table, it is interesting to know how people chose their media intake, and what is their perception about it. Studies have shown a growing distrusts toward the “mainstream” media.

Since most voters in America rely on the media’s coverage to portray the candidates’ views and personality, networks have an incredible influence on the result of the popular vote. However, some networks can depict obscure views and network news audiences can receive an entirely different account about candidates depending on who or what they watch.

Not all political information the media conveys is positive. The difference in coverage from the media can generate a change within the voting behavior of the public. By examining studies that have dove deep into the relationship between the negative media content and voting behavior, one can identify different causal relationship between the two. Elenbaas and Devreese (2008) developed a study analyzing strategic news exposure, political criticisms, and the effects on young voters. Through their analysis, they generated findings of negative media content leading to a “NO Vote”. The results additionally established a relationship that generated a greater chance for younger voters’ political opinions to change, in contrasted to older generations.

When political candidates are campaigning these days they are using the media as a way to get votes to get elected. The influence of mass media, American politics have been quite a spectacle about it, and the way that politics are run using the media. The idea of mass media mass media is supposed to make it easier for people to participate in political decisions, understand how everything works in politics, and hold government officials accountable. But during this generation the media is often used to manipulate and obscure the true form of political issues. The diversion of attention is one strategy

American politics includes a series of conflicts and compromises between the different components of government. The division between the Democrats and Republicans in Congress often reflect the public as each group champions their often controversial opinions with the hope they are enacted as laws. Trying to make sense of the American government and politics, therefore, includes a lot of in-depth analysis of the underlying issues and political ideologies of each group. News media is an important component of American democracy since it is the main source of political information for Americans. The mainstream media sources include TV, radio, print and Internet-based sources. The news media is an independent watchdog that closely monitors the political arena and conveys it to the public with the Liberal model being the most effective model of the American political news media.

The emergence of new media and the rise of different forms of media outlets have greatly changed global media, providing audiences with multiple novel options for news consumption. This extremely high choice environment undoubtedly has some major implications with respect to politically charged news. Before the advent of radio, cable news channels, and most recently, the Internet, local newspapers and evening news broadcasts served as the primary outlets for political news. Moreover, the dynamics of how audiences consume -and now, even produce- media are changing, in addition to the ways in which media industries define their audiences. New media technologies at the heart of all of these changes such as print, broadcast television, cable news and even the internet give audiences increased control and increased choice over when, where, and how they consume mass media that is slowly transforming the relationship between audiences and the media. Concurrently, new technologies for measuring and monitoring audience behavior are revealing aspects of how and why audiences consume different forms of media that previously were unknown. As a result, there is a commonality to the news people consume regardless of their geographic location, issue positions, or ideological stance.

Every day we rely on the news to keep us abreast of the state of affairs in our lives. From the tiniest of towns to the largest sprawling metropolis we need our news to be accurate, objective and we need it fast. As times change not only does the way in which we get our news change but in how it is presented to us. Biases in our media have always existed but the public’s distrust of the media because of these biases is quite high. Recent polls show that nearly 80 percent of Americans believe that the media influenced by influenced by the powerful and that they tend to favor one side of issues over another (Keiner, 2013, p. 401). A Pew Research Center poll conducted in 2011 found that 77 percent of respondents believed news organizations tend to favor one side over the other (Keiner, 2013, p. 405).

While the depths of how the government ultimately makes every decision for the citizens, we realize that everything in social today is based off of politics and political standings. While some may argue that political issues do not matter in real life, others may differ due to the fact that political issues do matter in real life. From elections affect the general public, and those attempting to find the greater good and common ground for citizens within societies we realize that there is no such thing as a world without politics. For instance, day-to-day errands such as: driving a car, grocery shopping, or meeting our everyday needs are brought to us by something political or someone within the community of politics. “53% feel they have a political voice in this country” (“Statistics on High School Students and Teenagers,” 2012) This essay argues that political issues do matter in real life, due to the fact that politics interferes with the society, the economy, and those within it. Ideally those within the society controls the political standings, hence political ideas do matter in real life. Though from time to time being unable to clearly

The danger of untrustworthy news is that the public can simply become misinformed. On one hand, misinformation might inspire people to foster unhealthy relationships towards each other based on class, gender, race, and sexual preference. On the other hand, however, people might use that same information to make important decisions such as who to vote for during elections, or what bills to pass. In other words, the mainstream media use all sorts of psychological tricks to mesmerize public opinion. Which in turn affects the future of the country’s well-being. This is why political bias in the media is such a hot topic today.

Voting is an expression of hope, a belief that a citizen’s input into the system will yield social dividends. Without hope, citizens doubt that anything they say or do will change the country for their benefit. Viewing it from another perspective, politicians rarely offer disillusioned citizens reasons for optimism. As a result, those citizens don’t show up at the polls and vote because they do not believe that anything politicians say or do will make life better for them according to Fulwood (2014).

Information introduced to the public is the key to a successful possession of any political leadership position. Those who control the information flow control the collective minds of the people. They control how much the public knows and, ultimately, how the public feels. The struggle for power through information in a democratic system mentioned before is a battle waged by two major contenders: the government and the media. Mass media can be defined as venues for messages that are created for consumption by a large number of audience members willing to listen. The media though out history has shown how each improved source of mass media output has changed the political ideas of the public. Democracy and media over the years have worked together for both the growth of candidates and the chaos of campaigns. The free speech and free press clauses given to us through the First Amendment to the United States Constitution have been interpreted as providing the same protection to speakers as to writers, except for wireless broadcasting which has been given less constitutional protection. The Free Press Clause protects the right of individuals to express themselves through publication and dissemination of information, ideas and opinions without interference, constraint or prosecution by the government. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regulates though laws to protect against libel, slander, and obscenity media behavior and the judiciary imposes limitations as