How and why do bias' arise in the media?
how and why do bias' arise in the media? The growth of technology since the 1950's has led to an explosion in media communications. Television is now available to 98% of the population although in recent years newspaper circulation has declined. The media report on news, selected by themselves and communicated to us second hand which does not allow for immediate feedback or debate. Television, including radio, has different rules and format to that of the press, newspapers, magazines etc. Each report the news in differing ways. The question of bias is more difficult to pigeon hole. During elections bias could be unequal reporting of parties, at other times it may be an unhealthy interest in attacking the Government or other parties, although because the Government is in power they often attract more attention than political debate which is perceived not to change or influence changes in society. If we look at television and radio they are bound by very strictly controlled legislation so as not to create bias. The B.B.C. follows guidelines set out in its "Yellow Book" and I.T.V. cannot take any political advertisements. Both sides must follow a balance of reporting in proportion to the support (in number of votes) of each party in the last election. This has not stopped Norman Tebbit from monitoring the B.B.C. who he perceived to be raving socialists. This may seem strange to
Multiculturalism in the basis for the Canadian identity.
Multiculturalism in the basis for the Canadian identity Canada has been declared by the UN to be one of the best countries in the world in which to live - yet to define our identity is like trying to nail smoke to the wall. Canada is a nation of many cultures. There are Canadians from nearly every ethnic background imaginable, be they French or English, or descendent from immigrants from all corners of the world. In 1971, the Trudeau government adopted a policy of multiculturalism within a bilingual framework. Multiculturalism is here to stay, but is it beneficial to the formation of the Canadian identity? The policy can be observed in a very negative light. Canadians are a rag-tag assortment of people from every nationality imaginable. As a result, its relatively small population, spread over a large area, shares no unifying traits or customs. Immigrants are encouraged to maintain their distinctiveness from the rest of the Canadian population, and even those Canadians who are descended from the original colonists share no identity of their own. Thanks to bilingualism, many Canadians do not even understand one another, let alone feel a common bond or share distinctive characteristics. Canada's policy of multiculturalism within a bilingual framework has lent it a confused and feeble national identity. This is not at all the case. Canada began with the fusing of two
How far was Lord Liverpool's government directly responsible for the popular unrest of the years 1815-1820?
Natalya Frederick 2BW How far was Lord Liverpool's government directly responsible for the popular unrest of the years 1815-1820? Although much of the legislation passed and many of the tactics used by Lord Liverpool's government in response to the unrest in the years 1815-1820 aggravated the situation, they were not directly responsible for the popular discontent. Some of the reasons for discontent pre-dated the Liverpool administration. Lord Liverpool's government took office in 1812, when the Luddite movement was already at its peak - the first major and open displays of radical discontent. Not only did industrialisation cause new technological advances to replace workers, but the remaining workers (particularly in major cities) experienced worsening working conditions and lower pay at the hands of ruthless employers who wanted to meet the increasing demand for heavy goods. Another reason for discontent that was largely beyond government control, was the population growth of the time and the subsequent migration to newly industrialised urban areas for employment opportunities. The high population in poor urban areas resulted in social problems such as poor sanitation, squalor, disease and over-crowding. These problems were exacerbated by the end of the Napoleonic war, which marked the end of the economic 'boom' period that the country had enjoyed due to demands
“The author of its own downfall” – Is this a fair verdict on the first Labour Government? Givereasons to support your answer.
"The author of its own downfall" - Is this a fair verdict on the first Labour Government? Give reasons to support your answer The first Labour Government began in December 1923; by 1924, this Government had collapsed, There were many reasons for this downfall, and to assess the validity of the given statement it is necessary to investigate them. Some factors can be attributed to Labour itself, such as how they dealt with the issues that faced them, the internal pressures within the party, and MacDonald's leadership. However, it is essential to appreciate the obvious weaknesses of a minority government, and the effect of these on the party's demise. One of the major factors leading to the downfall of Labour were the internal pressures within the party, this was due mainly to the moderate policy line the party was forced to take, and the conflict this caused with trade union and left-wing members. The party was funded by, and had many members of, trade unions, this funding meant that the trade unions expected to be able to control the Government, and expected it to confront issues such as nationalisation. The trade union leaders were uncompromising and unrealistic, so there was great friction with the Labour party leaders. In addition, some left-wing party members wished to pursue unrealistic socialist policies, to deliberately engineer defeat, allowing Labour to rally
How far did Ferdinand and Isabella create a new monarchy in Spain?
How far did Ferdinand and Isabella create a new monarchy in Spain? In 1540 Spain was nothing more then a geographical impression such as 'Germany' or 'Italy'. It was divided into a number of states the largest being Castile. Each state was ruled differently, the kingdom of Aragon for instance was sub divided into three kingdoms each with its own Cortes (parliament) and laws: the kingdom of Aragon, the kingdom of Catalonia and the kingdom of Valencia. The emirate of Granada, another Spanish state was unlike the others, Islamic. The reigns of Ferdinand and Isabella marked an important stage in the development of Spain in to a new unified state. On 14th October 1469 Isabella of Castile married Ferdinand of Aragon for short term political gain in a period of great political instability. In the 15th century Castile and Aragon had weak monarchies; in Castile the monarch was faced by a powerful aristocracy. By 1481 both Ferdinand and Isabella had been given co-equal powers in both states, with this they were able to re-establish law and order and to prepare the conditions which enabled Spain to become a major western European power in the 16th century. Ferdinand and Isabella immediately began by attempting to restore law and order. In 1476 the Cortes of Madrigal in Castile set up the league of brotherhoods, this involved every village or town with over 50 inhabitants. With the
Make note of the stability of the present two political party system
Abstract In Two Parties - Or More? The American Party System, Dr. John F. Bibby, a professor of American politics at the University of Wisconsin, and L. Sandy Maisel (1998), a professor in the department of government at Colby College, make note of the stability of the present two political party system: Each has sustained dramatic swings of fortune - landslide victories, demoralizing defeats, cliffhanger wins and losses, major splinter movements, and realignments of bases for electoral support. Despite the fluidity of voting patterns over the decades and political dislocations created by two world wars, depressions, waves of new immigrants, industrialization, urbanization, globalization, and changes in lifestyles, the Republican-Democratic two-party system endures. (p. 48) Dominating electoral politics since 1854 (Bibby & Maisel, p. 21), the two-party system has stood up to such challenges with the assistance of several American institutional arrangements, such as the single-member district system, the Electoral College, and media influences including the Commission on Presidential Debates. During this time, the two-party system has helped to maintain political stability, fostered political legitimacy, and promoted national unity. To preserve this stability and retain the additional benefits of having a two-party system, the United States should continue to
What were the causes of the 1905 Russian Revolution? How successful was this revolution?
The Russian Revolution What were the causes of the 1905 Russian Revolution? How successful was this revolution? Introduction: A revolution is a change of government associated with violence. The revolution that broke out in Russia in 1905 was a result of both long and short term causes. The long term causes being the Czarist Autocracy and the discontent that had grown among the people of Russia. The short-term causes were the Russo - Japanese War and Bloody Sunday. Theses events led to disruption throughout Russia and resulted in the October Manifesto. Although the Czar wasn't overthrown, there were a few successful developments that could later be improved on. The long term causes of the Russian revolution in 1905 were the Czarist Autocracy and the discontent of the people The Czarist Autocracy and the discontent of the people were related in an abstract way. An autocracy is a government led by one man who makes all the decisions, in 1905 it being Nicholas II. An autocracy in Russia 1905 led to no elections, no parliament, censorship of the media and the secret police. The secret police (okrhana) was used to investigate people who were thought to be against the Czar and if caught were imprisoned or shot. Censorship stopped people from criticism, censorship also existed in schools and the Government controlled the jury system. This system led to one of a dictatorship - a
How democratic is Britain?
How democratic is Britain? Democracy is a political system in which the supreme power lies in a body of citizens who can elect people to represent them. We say that Britain is a democracy; every four years we elect politicians to represent our views and opinions. But given that the majority of politicians are white, middle age, middle class men how can we say that they are truly representative of the entire population. Is Britain a true democracy when only 59% of the people vote? The other 40% of the population's voice is not being heard at all. Although all have to right to vote many feel that it is pointless because the parties they want to vote for will never get in power. Their view may not be heard because of the constituency they live in and the fact that our voting system is "first past the post". "The first past the post" system dictates that each constituency, holds an election where they vote for the candidate of their choice. The candidate with the majority of the votes then becomes their representative or MP. But this means that the candidate that comes second does not get any power and this becomes a problem where a there is a stronghold of one of the major parties over an area and if you do not agree with the majority of your constituency then your vote will not be heard and be of no significance which accounts for the lack of voter turn out. An example of
Persuasive Assignment - Fox Hunting: Would a ban work?
Persuasive Assignment - Fox Hunting: Would a ban work? Fox Hunting has become a big issue in recent years. With the imminent ban of fox hunting the nation has seen many demonstrations including The Countryside March and the more recent Liberty and Livelihood March. In this assignment I am not aiming to persuade you to change your personal view on fox hunting; the majority of people have already formed strong personal views on the subject. After the bitter argument over fox hunting, a new question has emerged: could a ban on hunting be made to work? In this essay I hope to outline the loopholes in the proposed ban and it's effect to our countryside and economy, and the cost of a ban to the goverment. Many people think that the Hunting Bill is just about banning people from riding across the countryside with a pack of hounds chasing a fox. It is in fact a great deal more than that. The years of argument over the pros and cons are over. Hunting has been shown to be as humane as other methods of wildlife management both in the Government's independent inquiry, the Burns Report, and in the three days of public hearings at Portcullis House. Recently in the House of Lords a Government Bill was defeated by a majority of 250. The Lord Chancellor Lord Falconer, Deputy Leader of the House of Lords Baroness Symons and Minister Lord Rooker among many, all voted against a ban on hunting;
To what extent has New Labour abandoned traditional Labour values?
To what extent has New Labour abandoned traditional Labour values? After decades of consistent defeat, the Labour party sought the need for change in the early 1980s. Although Labour started to change under the leadership of Neil Kinnock in 1983, it wasn't until 1990 that Peter Mandelson, then the party's director of communications, was able to claim that "we have now effectively completed the building of the new model party". And it wasn't until 1994 when Tony Blair was chosen to lead the Labour party that the "New Labour" project was introduced. The introduction of New Labour was aimed at getting rid of the "party of the past" image that Labour had earned to itself and also to evolve into an electable party. For this to happen, radical policy changes needed to be made. In Blair's view, "Labour needed a quantum leap to become a serious party of government again". There were however, significant constraints on the way to achieving drastic changes. An attempt to modernise the Party was in need to change policies which were formulated based on values which the party was actually based and founded upon. The changes that were proposed by Tony Blair and those who shared his views were in clear contrast with the Socialist ideology on which the Labour Party had originated from. The proposed changes also sought to prevent the Trade Unions- another main source of the Party's