The Effects of Media Bias

August John HoffmanCalifornia State University Northridge

andCompton Community College

Julie WallachCalifornia State University Northridge

The current research investigated whether bias exists in newspapers that are consid-ered liberal or conservative, and whether this bias influences public opinion ofevents. Participants were college students (N = 67) who were enrolled in a 4-yearuniversity (n = 33) or a community college (n = 34). Participants were shown photo-graphs and short articles (from the Los Angeles Times, New York Times, DailyNews–Los Angeles, and Orange County [CA] Register) relating to a Presidentialdebate between President George W. Bush and Senator John Kerry. Participantscompleted questionnaires relating to their opinion of the candidates. Results showedstatistical significance within groups before and after exposure to the newspaperclippings.

In the early 1900s, Lippman and Merz (1919) noted that the New YorkTimes reported events regarding the Russian Revolution as “a case of seeingnot what was, but what men wished to see.” Lippman and Merz said thatjournalism should be the study of evidence and verification. They recom-mended a scientific approach to journalism, as well as formal training forjournalists.

From the time Lippman and Merz (1919) made these recommendationsthrough the mid 20th century, the public relied almost completely on news-papers to receive information regarding current events. Data show that in1950, close to every household subscribed to a newspaper. By 2000, thisnumber had dropped by half (Editor and Publisher International Yearbook,2003). According to Pew Research Center for People and the Press (2002),newspaper readership is on the decline, and newspapers reach a lower pro-portion of the population than in the past.

Although the Pew (2002) study showed a drop in readership, over half ofthose questioned believe that the quality of newspaper reporting is thehighest, as compared to other media outlets. Research conducted by theReadership Institute (Smith & Reinhardt, 2003) found that readers usethe newspaper to obtain a better understanding of the news disseminated byother media outlets. The standards and need for objective reporting are notonly necessary for newspapers, but for the dozens, if not hundreds, of media

616

Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 2007, 37, 3, pp. 616–624.© 2007 Copyright the AuthorsJournal compilation © 2007 Blackwell Publishing, Inc.

outlets offered today. Though newspapers may not reach as many peoplenow as in the past, and because the public does not access newspapers at theexact moment a story “breaks,” there is power in the content of newspaperreporting. Research regarding public perceptions of newspaper contentshows that 69% believe that newspapers “understand the issues that areimportant to a local community,” “conduct more careful research,” provide“better explanations,” “have different points of view on controversialissues,” and have “higher standards for accuracy” than do television pro-grams (American Society of Newspaper Editors, 2002). Thus, the public isput in a precarious situation: A high number do not trust the media, butbelieve that newspapers are more believable than are other sources. If news-paper reporting is regarded more favorably than other media outlets, but inactuality there is a bias, readers could be influenced wrongly by newspaperreporting.

Newspapers often provide corrections of omissions and misinformation.For example, the New York Times corrected their coverage of eventsregarding the war in Iraq, stating that they “found a number of instancesof coverage that was not as rigorous as it should have been. In somecases, information that was controversial then, and seems questionablenow, was insufficiently qualified or allowed to stand unchallenged” (May19, 2004). Although the Times admitted wrongdoing, the articles hadalready been printed, read, and—based on public opinion of accuracy innewspaper reporting—perhaps agreed upon by readers. Readers will haveto keep current on newspaper accounts of misinformation, errors, andomissions as often as the news itself, particularly in the Times example.Note that they mentioned “a number” of instances of unchallengedinformation.

Gloseclose and Milyo (2003) measured media bias according to a scoringsystem of political party bias. Their data showed that the Los Angeles Timesand New York Times (along with “CBS Evening News” and USA Today) areliberal in their reporting. The method used to define liberal was based onquantitative analysis of news reporting that counts how many times liberal/conservative think tanks are cited, or particular sentences are used that depictpartisan statements.

Gentzkow and Shapiro (2004) cited different accounts of a battle foughtin Iraq, comparing Fox News, the New York Times, and the English-language version of Al Jazeera. In each story, there was a different “take” onthe events, with the researchers suggesting selective omission of the facts byeach reporter. The New York Times reported the battle as instigating furtherhostility by Iraqis against Americans, along with statements discussing thenegative implications of U.S. involvement in Iraq, both reflecting liberalviews of the war in Iraq.

EFFECTS OF MEDIA BIAS 617

55

66

77

What is Bias?

According to Mullainathan and Shleifer (2002), there are two types ofmedia bias. Ideology is the goal of media outlets to sway public opinion, andspin is the attempt to produce a story that the public considers memorable.For the purposes of this study, we will use both types, as defined by Mul-lainathan and Shleifer.

According to the American Society of Newspaper Editors (1999), aneditor of a large daily newspaper1 stated, “I think people realize the press hasits own agenda—a middle-class, White suburban or hip urban, college-educated, somewhat liberal version of how the world should be.” The demo-graphics of newspaper distribution are consistent with this statement. As of2004, the vast majority of readers are middle-aged or older, married with acollege education, work in middle management or as professionals, andalmost all own a home (Newspaper Association of America, 2003).

Is the News Really News?

The demographics of newspaper readership influence how the mediareport the news; however, a stronger, more powerful force drives mediaoutlets to skew the news. Groseclose and Milyo (2004) cited the media asbeing commonly called the fourth branch of government. This close relation-ship between media and government is illustrated by a conversation heldbetween Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Richard Myers and DanRather. CBS’s 60 Minutes obtained photographs of the Abu Ghraib prisonscandal, but waited 2 weeks before airing the photographs (see Folkenfilk,2004, as cited in Gentzlow & Shapiro, 2004). Myers allegedly “asked DanRather not to broadcast the photos.”

The relationship between media and government is a prime example of theinfluence of outside sources on the media. Choosing when to publicize pho-tographs may not always be a result of honoring the request of a politician.Strategies such as where, when, and how articles are placed on the front pageof newspapers is influential. As a writer for the Washington Post described,the front page “is a newspaper’s billboard, its way of making a statementabout what is important, and stories trumpeted there are often picked up byother news outlets” (Washington Post, 2004). The importance of an event canchange dramatically simply by what section the story is in; where in thatsection; and if on the front page, how large it is and where it is placed. Special

1The information was not provided in the report.

618 HOFFMAN AND WALLACH

88

99 10 99 10

1111

1212

care should be taken when choosing photographs and stories for the frontpage, in order to remain as unbiased as possible.

As a whole, newspapers are known for their slant on news reporting, butindividual journalists who work for these media outlets are also responsiblefor accuracy and objectivity. The scandal involving Jason Blair of the NewYork Times is an example of this. With substantial competition in the media,journalists may vie for stories to the extent that the stories are not fullyresearched or—even more blatantly—completely falsified. The way in whichjournalists are educated is also of concern: Of approximately 500 journalistsinterviewed, the vast majority stated that they have learned strategies toprevent bias by “by trial and error and on my own or from a friend.” Fewjournalists cited journalism school or employers as a source for establishingand maintaining objectivity in their reporting ( journalism.org, “The LostMeaning of Objectivity”).

In a landmark study by Lichter and Rothman (1981), it was found that81% of the journalists interviewed voted for a Democratic Presidential can-didate in every election between 1964 and 1976, and journalists are liberalwith respect to social values. A more recent study conducted by the Projectfor Excellence in Journalism and The Committee of Concerned Journalists(2004) found that 34% of journalists consider themselves liberal, while 7%reported being conservative.

An example of journalists favoring liberal views occurred during the 2004Presidential campaign, during a speech given to journalists by Senator JohnKerry (Unity, 2004). It was noted that journalists gave strong applausethroughout the speech and a standing ovation to the candidate (USA Today,August 8, 2004). Journalists are entitled to their political beliefs. However,there is a danger when this becomes their style of news reporting. An addi-tional problem is the significant difference between the ways in which jour-nalists believe the public wish to receive their news, with 68% stating that theyprefer “straight-up” reporting (i.e., no interpretation by journalists). In fact,according to the American Society of Newspaper Editors (1999), 93% of thegeneral public wish to receive no interpretation of events.

Codes of Ethics

According to the Society of Professional Journalists’ (1996) Code ofEthics, journalists should “never distort the content of news photos or video.Image enhancement for technical clarity is always permissible. Label mon-tages and photo illustrations.” Distortion, however, is not clearly defined,and if left to interpretation could be used to emphasize the strength of aperson and importance of an event by something as simple as the angle or

EFFECTS OF MEDIA BIAS 619

1313

1414

1515

1616

1717

1818

placement of a photograph. The National Press Photographers Association(2004) states in their Code of Ethics that photojournalists should “be com-plete and provide context when photographing or recording subjects. Avoidstereotyping individuals and groups. Recognize and work to avoid presentingone’s own biases in the work.” The Association further states that “Photo-graphs can . . . cause great harm if they are callously intrusive or are manipu-lated.” There are magazines that have been sued for photographs that werecut and pasted by employees of the company, and are notorious for doing so.However, subtle manipulation can, unbeknownst to readers, sway theiropinion in a slanted direction.

Based on the preponderance of evidence that bias exists in newspapers asa whole, and with individual journalists, we hypothesize that exposure to thevarying analyses of election coverage by the four newspapers used in thestudy will change the opinion of the “winner” of the 2004 Presidential elec-tion debates. We expect that this change will occur by the manner in whichthe candidates were portrayed in photographs and in short, interpretivearticles from the front pages of the newspapers.

Method

Participants

Study participants (N = 67) were undergraduate students from CaliforniaState University Northridge (n = 34) and from Compton Community College(n = 33). Those who participated in the study were given one unit of researchparticipation credit in an introductory psychology course.

Materials and Apparatus

Photographs and short articles were given to each participant for review.All of the original photographs and articles were photocopied onto8.5 in. ¥ 17 in. paper. Materials were photocopied in their original format:Color and black-and-white materials were presented as they were first printedin the newspapers, with the exception of enlarging the articles for uniformityof size (see Appendix A). Participants each completed three questionnaires(see Appendices B, C, and D).

Procedure

A questionnaire was administered to all potential participants to screenout those who expressed strong liberal or conservative political views

620 HOFFMAN AND WALLACH

1919

2020

(Appendix A). Those who considered themselves to be moderate in theirpolitical beliefs were asked to stay for the remainder of the study.

Participants were asked to complete a survey that includes questionsabout they type of media outlet they use to obtain information regardingcurrent events and their view of current events (e.g., the current administra-tion, decisions made by the United States regarding the war in Iraq, whichcandidate is more capable of “doing a good job”; Appendix B). Afterthey completed the survey, participants were given photographs and shortarticles regarding the first Presidential debate of 2004, along with a secondsurvey asking rephrased questions about their opinion of political events(Appendix C).

Results

Data were analyzed using a within-subjects design to measure the degreeof change before and after exposure to newspaper photographs and articles.The results showed statistical significance within groups before and afterexposure to the newspaper clippings, F(1, 66) = 6.72, p < .05.

Discussion

Based on the data, we suggest that exposure to the articles subtly influ-enced and distracted participants’ objectivity. Newspaper accounts of the2004 Presidential debates between President George W. Bush and SenatorJohn Kerry are a clear demonstration of the power of the placement ofphotographs and articles. The day after each debate, photographs appearedon the front pages of national and local newspapers. Depending on thenewspaper, the angles of the candidates were different: Liberal newspapersshowed President Bush’s head from behind with a close-up of Senator Kerrysmiling, while others showed President Bush appearing more powerful thanSenator Kerry (based on commonly known nonverbal gestures). The photo-graphs often were accompanied by complimentary or critical comments ofeach candidate, depending on the newspaper that reported the debates, withnewspapers drawing conclusions about who “won” the debates. Newspaperswith a liberal slant showed Senator John Kerry as “winning” the debatesmore often than President Bush, while traditionally conservative newspapersreported President Bush as more successful in the debates. Based on theperception that newspapers are more honest and reliable in their reporting ofthe news, we suggest that this gives them more power to influence the public,making readers more vulnerable to believing inaccurate or biased news.

EFFECTS OF MEDIA BIAS 621

Using participants who do not represent the average newspaper readerallowed for less participant bias; the knowledge that traditional newspaperreaders have regarding certain newspaper bias is less known by our partici-pants, allowing for greater freedom in viewing the photographs and readingthe stories. If the participants represented the average newspaper reader,they perhaps would have knowledge of the slant in newspaper reporting(e.g., the Los Angeles Times and New York Times as liberal) and wouldhave been privy to the research hypothesis. In this study, the population(undergraduate students at a university and a community college) gave usa clearer idea of how newspaper stories and photographs can changeindividual opinion, particularly since they have less knowledge of newspa-pers’ goal to reach a target audience than do those who read newspapersregularly.

In reviewing the literature regarding media bias, we found that liberalsand conservatives both argue in favor of outdoing media bias. Interestingly,the researchers found that well known organizations, which purport to advo-cate objectivity, are themselves biased. Liberal websites (e.g., MediaWatch.org, FAIR, Common Dreams.org) argue that the media are unfairlyconservative in their reporting. Conversely, conservative websites (e.g.,MediaResearch.org, Brent Bozell, National Review Online) assert that themedia are biased. Both state their claims with evidence, but overall there is aflavor and suggestion that liberals think conservatives are swaying the newsand vice versa. If news reporting is meant to be neutral, the researchers arguethat these websites and other outlets should be fair to those with differingviews by exposing all forms of bias to the reader.

Further research could involve Internet headlines and how media outletsshow their stories. For example, AOL features headlines that flash photo-graphs of the latest news events. How they choose to portray events, andwhat is shown first, is similar to that of television news programs. What is themost important event of the moment? On the Internet, we are indeed dealingwith time in seconds, rather than newspapers, which have much more time tochoose headlines. If subjects are exposed to the Internet headlines ofCNN.com, AOL.com, and perhaps Fox News online, the differences ininterpretation of headline stories (and how this affects subjects) can speak toInternet news reporting. This also may appeal to a college audience, which ismore likely to get its news from the Internet than from newspapers (News-paper Association of America, 2003).

T. S. Eliot (1920) used the term objective correlative to describe the powerof juxtaposing words, objects, and items. Objective correlative is the termused to describe the “technique through which the image on the packagecauses a product and an image/emotion to become linked in our minds”(Williamson, 2000). This concept has been borrowed quite effectively by

622 HOFFMAN AND WALLACH

2121

2222

2323

newspapers as a method of developing a story fully, particularly with pho-tographs, titles of articles, and their relationship to each other.

The idea of the front page of a newspaper being used as a billboard (seeKurtz, 2004) suggests that newspapers advertise the news. Newspaper com-panies have a right to sell newspapers, but if they must make their front pagescaptivating and catchy, we urge subscribers and nonsubscribers who arepulled into this advertising to be aware: You may be buying the news thatothers want you to read versus the news as it truly occurs.

References

American Society of Newspaper Editors. (1999, August 4). Examining ourcredibility. Retrieved November 7, 2004, from http://www.asne.org/kiosk/reports,1999examiningourcredibility/p27-32_Bias.html

Browstein, R., & Hennessey, K. (2004, October 3). Viewers give Round 1 toKerry. Los Angeles Times, p. A1.

Editor and Publisher International Yearbook. (2003). Retrieved January13, 2005, from http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/images/pdf/US%20Daily%20Circ.%20by%20Circ.pdf

Eliot, T. S. (1920). The sacred wood: Essays on poetry and criticism. London,UK: Methune.

Gentzko, M., & Shapiro, J. M. (2004). Media bias and reputation. Unpub-lished manuscript, University of Chicago, Harvard University.

Groseclose, T., & Milyo, J. (2003). A measure of media bias. Unpublishedmanuscript, University of California Los Angeles, Stanford University,University of Chicago.

Hutcheson, R. (2004, October 1). Kerry’s verbal jabs put Bush on defensive.Orange County Register, p. 6.

Kerry supporters bombard reporters with positive spin. (2004, October 3).Los Angeles Times, p. A12.

Kincaid, C. (2004, August 25). Journalists cheer Kerry. Accuracy in media.Retrieved January 7, 2004, from http://www.aim.org/media_monitor/A1891_0_2_0_C/

Kuhnhenn, J., & Thomma, S. (2004, October 1). At odds over war. OrangeCounty Register, pp. A1, A5.

Lichter, S. R., & Farnsworth, S. (2003). Government: In and out of the news.Washington, DC: Center for Media and Public Affairs.

Lippman, W., & Merz, C. (1920, August 4). A test of the news. New Republic.Retrieved January 3, 2004, from http://musictravel.free.fr/political/political9.htm

Mackenzie, R. (2004, October 3). President stays on top with his straight talk.Los Angeles Daily News, pp. A1, A7.

EFFECTS OF MEDIA BIAS 623

2424

2525

2626

2727

2828

2929

3030

3131

3232

3333

3434

3535

3636

3737

Mullainathan, S., & Shleifer, A. (2002). Media bias. Unpublished manu-script, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Harvard University.

National Press Photographers Association. (2004). Code of ethics. Durham,NC: Author.

Newspaper Association of America. (2003, June 1). Profile of newspapersubscribers. Retrieved January 7, 2004, from http://www.naa.org

Pew Research Center for People and the Press. (2002, August 4). Newsmedia’s improved image proves short-lived. Retrieved January 7, 2004,from http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=159

Project for Excellence in Journalism. (2004). The state of the news media,2004: An annual report on American journalism. Retrieved January 7,2004, from http://www.stateofthenewsmedia.org

Purdum, T. S. (2004, October 1). Bush and Kerry clash over Iraq in debate.New York Times, pp. A1, A14.

Smith, M. P., & Reinhardt, H. (2003). The changing reader: Understandingthe forces changes newspapers. Chicago, IL: Readership Institute, Edito-rial Leadership Initiative, Northwestern University.

Society of Professional Journalists. (1996). Code of ethics. Indianapolis, IN:Eugene S. Pulliam National Journalism Center.

Williamson, K. L. (2000). Theories of persuasive communication and consumerdecision making. Unpublished manuscript, University of Texas at Austin,Austin, TX.

624 HOFFMAN AND WALLACH

3838

3939

AUTHOR QUERY FORM

Dear Author,During the preparation of your manuscript for publication, the ques-

tions listed below have arisen. Please attend to these matters and returnthis form with your proof.

Many thanks for your assistance.

QueryReferences

Query Remark

1 You must provide an address forcorrespondence here.

2 This is the only place in your text where youmention the four newspapers that you used inyour study. The abstract is merely a briefreporting of the study and its results. Youmust also mention these publications in thebody of your text. Please correct.

3 Lippman & Merz (1919) is not in theReferences. Provide the correct date (1920?)or the missing reference.

4 Lippman & Merz (1919) is not in theReferences. Provide the correct date (1920?)or the missing reference.

5 This citation is not in the References. Providethe missing reference, the source for thisinformation, and the page number for thisquote.

6 Gloseclose & Milyo (2003). Gloseclose orGroseclose? Provide correct spelling.

7 Gentzkow & Shapiro (2004). Gentzkow orGentzko? Provide correct spelling.

8 See footnote. To what “information” are youreferring here? Please clarify your meaning.

SNP Best-set Typesetter Ltd.Journal Code: JASP Proofreader: EmilyArticle No: 177 Delivery date: 22 December 2006Page Extent: 9

9 Groseclose & Milyo (2004). Groseclose orGloseclose? Provide correct spelling.

10 Groseclose & Milyo (2004) is not in theReferences. Provide the correct date (2003?)or the missing reference.

11 Gentzlow & Shapiro (2004). Gentzlow,Gentzkow, or Gentzko? You have nowprovided three different spellings of the samename. This is sloppy, especially in such ashort paper. Please provide the correctspelling throughout your text. (By the way,you also spelled “Abu Ghraib” incorrectly, butI fixed that spelling.)

12 This citation is not in the References. Providethe missing reference as well as the pagenumber for this quote.

13 “interviewed” by whom? What is the source ofthis information?

14 What is the significance of this parentheticalreference? There is no corresponding entry inthe References. Please correct.

15 Lichter & Rothman (1981) is not in theReferences. Provide the missing reference.

16 What is “Unity, 2004”? It is not in theReferences, so provide the missinginformation.

17 This parenthetical information is not in theReferences. Provide the missing reference.

18 What is the source of this information?Provide the source.

19 Provide the metric equivalent for thesemeasures.

20 Where are the appendices? You mention thatthere are supposed to be four appendices, yetnone of them appear in this paper.

21 What do you mean by “outdoing media bias”?Please clarify your meaning.

22 What does “Brent Bozell” mean here? Pleaseclarify your meaning.

23 Williamson (2000). Provide the page numberfor this quote.

24 Kurtz (2004) is not in the References. Providethe missing reference.

25 PLEASE NOTE: The References shouldinclude only those entries that you haveactually cited in your text. There are 9reference entries that you did not cite in yourtext.

26 Browstein & Hennessey (2004) is not cited inyour text. Please cite or delete from theReferences.

27 Gentzko & Shapiro (2004). Gentzko,Gentzkow, or Gentzlow? Provide correctspelling.

28 Gentzko & Shapiro (2004). Why have youlisted two universities here? There should beonly one listing for an unpublishedmanuscript.

29 Groseclose & Milyo (2003). Groseclose orGloseclose? Provide correct spelling.

30 Groseclose & Milyo (2003). Why have youlisted three universities here? There should beonly one listing for an unpublishedmanuscript.

31 Hutcheson (2004) is not cited in your text.Please cite or delete from the References.

32 “Kerry supporters” (2004) is not cited in yourtext. Please cite or delete from the References.

33 Kincaid (2004) is not cited in your text.Please cite or delete from the References.

34 Kuhnhenn & Thomma (2004) is not cited inyour text. Please cite or delete from theReferences.

35 Lichter & Farnsworth (2003) is not cited inyour text. Please cite or delete from theReferences.

36 Lippman & Merz (1920) is not cited in yourtext. Please cite or delete from the References.

37 Mackenzie (2004) is not cited in your text.Please cite or delete from the References.

38 Mullainathan & Shleifer (2002). Why haveyou listed two universities here? There shouldbe only one listing for an unpublishedmanuscript.

39 Purdum (2004) is not cited in your text.Please cite or delete from the References.