In what senses are media biased?
University of Kent at Canterbury
Faculty of Social Sciances
Department of Politics and International Relations
PO591 The Mass Media and British Politics
Professor Colin Seymour-Ure
In what senses are media biased?
In what senses are media biased?
The media are doubtlessly biased in one way or another. The BBC is supposed to be neutral in opinion and free of bias, but this essay will show that it also depends on audiences and their taste, and that it structures its schedule and programmes around them. Further, it will be discussed how influenced commercial television is and why, by looking at its main sponsors, namely advertisers. The print media are going to be analysed in terms of their political partiality, and their quality and biased view due to marketing pressures. Finally, this essay will briefly mention how the terrorist attack on America affected the media and advertisers.
While only ten per cent of the electorate believes that the television is biased, one third is of the opinion that the newspapers are more biased. This is because television that is the BBC, in this case, is seen as public property and therefore being controlled by the government, whereas anyone can publish a newspaper. As the BBC is public it is supposed to serve public interest.1 In relation to political bias, this arguments holds truth, as the BBC is only allowed to take political sides in states of emergency. This, for example, would be in the case of war when politicians attempt to calm the population down.2 The BBC, however, is not totally unbiased. Although it is not sponsored by advertisers as it finances itself by imposing licence fees on its audience, the BBC still structures its programme schedule around peoples taste. This is because it is in competition with the commercial television. A further reason for the importance of the audience is that the BBC would not have any justification for its fee, in case the audience rates fall.3 BBC's soap opera East Enders, for instance, which started in 1985, was a product of careful research. Due to this rivalry between the BBC and the private channel ITV, it had to find a programme that fitted into "everybody's lives" although soaps had not been associated with the BBC so far.4 Hence, even within the BBC was a certain form of bias, caused by marketing pressure in order not to lose their audience. Another example of how television organises its programmes in order to attract as many as possible viewers would be the fact that a normal schedule might be changed for a "special" occasion. A soap may be cancelled to show an interview, sports match or any other form of "emergency", just to make it seem extraordinary. There are, of course, some important themes as well that need immediate transmission such as the attack on America. These, however, are exceptions. The new fashion of pay-per-view is another case, where TV companies try to stress the uniqueness of a programme, as it makes the audience believe that it must be something special when one has to pay for it.5
Commercial TV, in contrast to the BBC, creates programmes in order to make profit. Since the costs for CTV are so high, they needed to find business-orientated people who would run the commercial television. This consequently brought some change to broadcasting. The BBC, for instance had administrators who mirrored the public service idea, as Seaton calls it; whereas entertainment professionals controlled CTV. This was important for commercial television depended and still depends much on advertising and therefore needs people who know how to attract as many viewers as possible that watch their sponsors' commercials.6
In the ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
Commercial TV, in contrast to the BBC, creates programmes in order to make profit. Since the costs for CTV are so high, they needed to find business-orientated people who would run the commercial television. This consequently brought some change to broadcasting. The BBC, for instance had administrators who mirrored the public service idea, as Seaton calls it; whereas entertainment professionals controlled CTV. This was important for commercial television depended and still depends much on advertising and therefore needs people who know how to attract as many viewers as possible that watch their sponsors' commercials.6
In the USA advertisers pay for particular programmes but as this gives them too much power, this system was rejected in the United Kingdom. Instead, only spot advertising is allowed, where the advertiser buys certain time slots between or within the programmes. Of course, the sponsors have some pre-knowledge about the broad character of the programme, but not the specific content. This information helps them to place their advertisements around programmes that "flatter" their products that they intend to sell. There are some cases, however, in which it is avoided to show their ads. An example for this would be flight commercials and flight accident documentaries.7
There are two ways of buying TV time. One is to purchase a guaranteed audience, where many little sections of audiences stretched over a range of programmes with low ratings are bought. The second possibility is to get advertising slots. Mostly advertisers are obliged by CTV producers to buy a combination of peak time slots and less wanted ones. However, Curran suggests that the advertisers are more in control of the kinds of audience their advertisements are going to reach if they buy specific advertising slots.8
As different programmes appeal to different social groups, due to content and times of broadcast, advertisers place their commercials into those programmes watched by the people they want to target. Some suggest that in order to perfectly address viewers, advertisements should be fitted in a range of programmes at different times and days. When the ads are shown at the same times each day, always the same audience would be watching the commercials. Although a certain frequency is desirable, the advertiser has to make sure that his ad is seen by as many different people as possible to maximise sales and this needs a variety in programme choice.9
According to Curran, the way in which TV time is sold affects the quality of audience appreciation as the quantity of audience is emphasised. Producers show the least favoured programmes in order to make the ads more appealing. This is called the "let's-give-the-public-the-programme-they-least-like-so-they'll-watch-the-ads" theory.10 This shows the inverse relationship between what people actually want and enjoy, and what the media provides them with.11
The marketing pressure leads producers to stress personal aspects of documentaries. Social problems are treated as if they were individual case studies in order to make them more appealing.12 Further, programme makers prefer genres because it minimises risk, helps to plan the budget more precisely and also helps to promote new products. Cable and satellite TV often carry programmes of one genre, which targets a specific audience. This drives specific products into the homes of a ready-made audience. Hence, certain types of viewers are addressed and particular genres are featured at specific times. Schedulers, for instance, believe that young people watch TV between five and seven in the afternoon, so ads that are supposed to be aimed at younger ones are shown at that time of the day.13 Thus, it is doubtless that commercial television too has to abide by certain rules set by market forces and their sponsors.
As already briefly mentioned, people believe that the print media are more biased in relation to politics than the televised medium is. Tabloids even openly admit their bias. Broadsheet papers, however, are not this open, but no one can deny that the Telegraph, for instance follows the Conservative line, too.14 This partiality in newspapers is due to the fact that there is no obligation for papers to be politically unbiased. According to Coxall, the British had supported only one paper along the Labour-line, namely the Daily Mirror, and the non-aligned papers, such as the Independent and the Guardian. Hence, the British press is mainly pro-conservative.15 This is due to the fact that the British society mostly supports the Tories and that the media therefore reflects the British culture. He argues that even the news is "socially manufactured" and that visually interesting material became news, rather than abstract developments: "News does not just happen, rather it is made."16 Seymour-Ure points out the nature of news: He says that events that are clear, unexpected or unusual become news. Further, if they fit a medium's cycle, that is daily papers for example or bulletins, or if they involve well-known places, countries or people, they make news; and above all news have to be negative in order to be "positive".17
According to Coxall, bias in relation to newspapers is inevitable in a society of mass consumption since the print media industry is under private control. The past few years papers have been mainly Conservative, because the readers were. In 1997, however, when Labour came to power, the newspapers either reduced their pro-Conservative line or switched to recommending voting Labour.18
Newspaper editors reduce the content's standards in an attempt to boost circulation in the market. This "dumbing-down" process, as the Americans call it, apparently affects the quality of the "quality" papers as well as the yellow press and therefore contributes to the "tabloidisation of the mass media". Further it is argued that some decades ago, the broadsheet papers made much greater demands on readers by addressing their information to educated people. According to Coxall, the last ten years, quality papers have resembled tabloids.19 This is due to the fact that television has taken over the important task of reporting news, and therefore the print media have changed they way in which they report on politics. They mess with private business of politicians although it has no direct relevance to politics. They only obey market forces.20 As advertisers sponsor papers and magazines, the print media have to please the readers and therefore stress more the entertainment side rather than the intellectual one. Advertisers favour especially local papers for they can target special groups of audience. People buy local papers to get local information, such as where to buy a car or where to get a job in town. Advertisers cover most of the actual costs that relates to the making of a paper and therefore make it cheaper for the consumer.21 Some argue, however, that the costs of advertising are passed onto the consumers anyway. This happens either directly through higher prices or indirectly through tax deductions that the companies receive.22
A current example of how closely the media, advertisements and tragic events are related is the disastrous "attack on America" of September 11th, when two airplanes crashed into the twin towers of the World Trade Centre. In an article of the Tennessean, it said, that the media companies, that had already problems with a yearlong fall of profits, had now to face another challenge. Advertisers withheld big commercial campaigns or even cancelled unsuitable ads due to this event. "For TV stations, the challenge", they stated, "was compounded by network news programming pre-emptying the scheduled commercial time." Producers of cars, their advertisers and dealers were amongst those who suffered the most consequences. Apparently, they are the first who suffer when people's confidence is low. Economists assumed that the coverage of the losses of advertising on a local as well national basis would cost $100 million dollars. Not only the televised media suffered but also the print media had to pay. Single-circulation increased, as usually happens in cases like this. However, because of increased pages, extra editions and employee overtime newspapers had to cover many expenses.23
In an overall view, it has to be said that the media, indeed, is biased. It does not always have to be in the political sense or that obvious. One could argue that the bias due to advertise pressure or marketing forces is a rather hidden one. However, no matter if the media states to be bias-free or not, there is some kind of bias. Although the BBC does not have to fight for advertisers and sponsors, it has to compete in the media market and therefore structures its programmes around the audience, which, as a matter of fact, is bias. Commercial TV has to get as many people as possible in front of the television in an attempt to gain profit. In the case of CTV one could say that it is a combination of BBC's reasons for bias and the pressure of getting sponsors. The print media is definitely biased, both politically and due to market pressure. The final article in this essay was supposed to illustrate how linked the press and mostly advertisement is and how much chaos an event can cause financially; to advertisers and the media.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Curran, J & Seaton, J. Power Without Responsibility. London: Routledge, 1997
Coxall, B & Lynton, R. Contemporary British Politics. New York : Palgrave, 1998
Heidt, J. Media Audience Up, Advertising Down. In The Tennessean. Sunday, 16.9.2001
Rayner, P et al. Media Studies: The Essential Introduction. London: Routledge, 2001
Seymour-Ure, C. The British Press and Broadcasting Since 1945. Oxford Blackwell, 1996
INTERNET RESOURCES
http://www.hmse.memphis.edu/WPSLC/sjackson.html
http://www.essaybank.co.uk/print/312.php
http://www.angliatv.co.uk/advertising/mechanics.html
http://www.essaybank.co.uk/print/312.php
2 Coxall, B & Lynton, R. Contemporary British Politics. Palgrave, 1998; pp. 192
3 Rayner, P et al. Media Studies: The Essential Introduction. Routledge, 2001; pp. 124
4 Seymour-Ure, C. The British Press and Broadcasting Since 1945. Blackwell, 1996; pp. 139
5 Rayner, P et al. Media Studies: The Essential Introduction. Routledge, 2001; pp. 120
6 Curran, J & Seaton, J. Power Without Responsibility. Routledge, 1997; pp. 185-6
7 Curran, J & Seaton, J. Power Without Responsibility. Routledge, 1997; pp. 187187-8
8 Curran, J & Seaton, J. Power Without Responsibility. Routledge, 1997; pp. 189
9 http://www.angliatv.co.uk/advertising/mechanics.html
0 Curran, J & Seaton, J. Power Without Responsibility. Routledge, 1997; pp. 190
1 Seymour-Ure, C. The British Press and Broadcasting Since 1945. Blackwell, 1996; pp. 138
2 Curran, J & Seaton, J. Power Without Responsibility. Routledge, 1997; pp. 191
3 Rayner, P et al. Media Studies: The Essential Introduction. Routledge, 2001; pp. 59,119
4 http://www.essaybank.co.uk/print/312.php
5 Coxall, B & Lynton, R. Contemporary British Politics. Palgrave, 1998; pp. 192
6 Coxall, B & Lynton, R. Contemporary British Politics. Palgrave, 1998; pp. 194-5
7 Seymour-Ure, C. The British Press and Broadcasting Since 1945. Blackwell, 1996; pp. 148
8 Coxall, B & Lynton, R. Contemporary British Politics. Palgrave, 1998; pp. 192
9 Coxall, B & Lynton, R. Contemporary British Politics. Palgrave, 1998; pp. 198-9
20 http://www.essaybank.co.uk/print/312.php
21 Rayner, P et al. Media Studies: The Essential Introduction. Routledge, 2001; pp. 123-4
22 http://www.hmse.memphis.edu/WPSLC/sjackson.html
23 Heidt, J. Media Audience Up, Advertising Down. In The Tennessean. Sunday, 16.9.2001
8
