The American Jewish community has been on a rampage these past two years because of their perception of “bias” against Israel in the press. A prominent New York rabbi even led a boycott of the New York Times a few months ago over an issue too ridiculous to repeat here.
But as Michael Brown points out, bias and inaccuracy are par for the course.
I was an invited speaker at a teach-in at Workman’s Circle, a couple weeks ago. One of the panels was comprised of representatives from the media. They cogently explained the difficulties the press faces in trying to present complex issues. Brown also discusses some of these as well. So I would say for the most part, at least in the news sections, it’s not bias, but time constraints, business constraints, ignorance, lack of access and a host of similar reasons that cause the press to be inaccurate.
As a reader, one needs to be very cautious. Try to find multiple sources on any story. Learn which reporters and which media outlets are most trustworthy and accurate. Try to find alternative sources and viewpoints on any issue. By the way, these are rules I myself follow in writing for this weblog. I spend quite a bit of time researching the features, and try to verify, to the extent possible, any statement I present as a “fact.”
Opinion, of course is a different matter. Here the reader has to apply different criteria. An argument can be cogent, logical, coherent — or not. As I noted elsewhere, an analysis can meet these criteria even if you don’t agree with it. It is usually in the premises and conclusion that the writer expresses his values. So whether a reader accepts or rejects an analysis, is not only dependent on how good the argument is, but whether the reader shares values with the author.