Media Bias: How Much Does it Hurt or Help the Media-Public Relationship? A Senior Project Presented to The Faculty of the Journalism Department California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Bachelor of Science in Journalism By Aidan Mathews August 2016 © Aidan Mathews 2016 Abstract The focus of this research paper is to qualify the relationship between the public and the Media and to discover how much Media bias, or the perception of Media bias affects that relationship. An important angle taken in this study is the question of whether or not bias on the part of the Media actually helps the public when forming educated opinions. The review of existing literature on Media bias and public perception of the Media and the collection of data via interviews with expert, professional journalists have led to two conclusions about the Media-public relationship: (1) in order for the relationship to function well, there must be an “authentic trust” between the two parties – a trust that accepts the possibility of misinformation or bad reporting (Flores and Solomon 1998); and (2) the relationship must also be mutually-beneficial. The major harbinger to the mutually beneficial relationship is the Uses and Gratification Theory – which means that the public only consumes what reaffirms their own biases and opinions. This is part of the growing phenomenon of non-Media members becoming their own journalists, thanks to the growing technology industry. All of the interviews conducted in this study found the respondents agreed on this: the Media ought to explain its mistakes, especially apparent biases in their reporting. The conclusion is that Media bias, when apparent and carefully pointed out by the Media, can benefit the public in that it aids the formulation of original opinions in the head of the consumer.   ii Table of Contents Chapter 1  .........................................................................................................................................................  1   Statement of the Problem  .....................................................................................................................  1   Background of the Problem  .................................................................................................................  1   Purpose of the Study  ..............................................................................................................................  2   Setting for the Study  ..............................................................................................................................  2   Research Questions  ................................................................................................................................  3   Definition of Terms  ................................................................................................................................  3   Organization of Study  ...........................................................................................................................  4   Chapter 2  .........................................................................................................................................................  5   Literature Review  ....................................................................................................................................  5   Existence of Trust Between the Media and the Public  ...............................................................  5   Creating Trust in the Media-Public Relationship  .........................................................................  6   Trusting Journalists  ................................................................................................................................  8   Consequences for Distrusting the Media  ........................................................................................  9   The Existence of Agenda in Reporting  .........................................................................................  10   Media Bias Helping Public Opinion  ..............................................................................................  11   Chapter 3  ......................................................................................................................................................  12   Methodology  ..........................................................................................................................................  12   Data Sources  ..........................................................................................................................................  12   Participants  .............................................................................................................................................  12   Interview Design  ..................................................................................................................................  12   Data Collection  .....................................................................................................................................  13   Data Presentation  .................................................................................................................................  14   Limitations  .............................................................................................................................................  14   Chapter 4  ......................................................................................................................................................  15   Data Analysis  ........................................................................................................................................  15   Description of Participating Experts in Data Collection  .........................................................  15   Data Collection Questionnaire  ........................................................................................................  16   Media-Public Relationship and Media Bias Research Questions  ........................................  21   Media-Public Relationship and Media Bias Data  .....................................................................  23   Chapter 5  ......................................................................................................................................................  29   Discussion and Recommendations  .................................................................................................  29   Summary  .................................................................................................................................................  29   Discussion  ..............................................................................................................................................  30   Recommendations for Practice  ........................................................................................................  34   Study Conclusion  .................................................................................................................................  36   References  ...................................................................................................................................................  38   Appendix A  .................................................................................................................................................  43   Appendix B  .................................................................................................................................................  48   Appendix C  .................................................................................................................................................  51     iii List of Tables Table 1. Existence of Trust Between the Media and the Public……………………27 Table 2. Creating Trust in the Media-Public Relationship………….….……………28 Table 3. Trusting Journalists…………………………………….…………………29 Table 4. Consequences for Distrusting the Media …………………………………30 Table 5. The Existence of Agenda in Reporting.……………………………………31 Table 6. Media Bias Helping Public Opinion….……………………………………31   iv Chapter 1 Introduction Statement of the Problem This study addresses the relationship between News Media and the public. In recent years, the public has become more disconnected to reporters and journalists: “A large percentage of the public believes that the news media are biased, and the majority of these individuals consider the direction of the bias to be against their own viewpoints” (Eveland, Shah 2003). This schism between the two necessary components of one of democracy’s most important relationships is clear in the broadcast world of today, but little research has been done to examine the benefits, if any, of partisanship and bias on the part of the News Media. Background of the Problem The existing literature concerning the Media-public relationship covers the prevalence of Media biases, the public’s disapproval of Media partisanship and how trust can be fostered between the two entities. Much of the attitude toward the Media in the existing literature is that of objection toward the News’ perceived bias, but this objection is often rooted in personal partisanship on the side of the consumer. Much of the disdain toward the Media today is due to “the tendency of people with divergent prior opinions” (Ladd 2009), otherwise known as the “Hostile Media Phenomenon.”   1 It is imperative for research to be done on this phenomenon to discover where the bias in the Media-public relationship lies, and more importantly, if the partisanship in the Media is beneficial to citizens when forming their own informed opinions. Purpose of the Study In an age of increasing technology on which to view News Media and the dominance of various social media outlets, the average member of the public can be his or her own journalist. The public no longer looks to the reporter for the totality of information; in fact the journalist has become the epitome of the term take with a grain of salt, at least in the eyes of the audience. By investigating the modern-day journalist through shadowing and interviewing three Media professionals, this study will portray the Media-public relationship through the perspective of the perceived biased Media member. Having an in-depth inquiry into the life of the reporter (whose goal is to be as objective as possible) could help humanize the Media – removing the distrust from the public’s eye. Setting for the Study This study will be done as part of the data collection for a Senior Project at California Polytechnic State University in San Luis Obispo, California. Interviews will be conducted with three professional reporters and journalists. Each interviewee will be shadowed while they are on the job as a journalist or reporter; each will be asked the same questions and probes. The questionnaire is geared specifically toward answering   2 the research questions and to help fill any holes in previous literature on the topic of News Media Bias Research Questions This study used the following research questions that were formatted to answer holes in the literature on the topic of Media bias and the public perception of such. Each question was created after exploring the information in the literature in order to gain pertinent and imperative data from professionals in the field of News Media. 1. Does the public trust the Media? 2. How does this trust between the Media and the public get made? 3. Are reporters and journalists untrustworthy? 4. What are the consequences for distrusting the Media? 5. Is having an agenda part of being a journalist? 6. Do Media agencies help the public shape their opinions? Definition of Terms The following terms are defined for clarification and to assist the reader by providing context to the remainder of the study. Authentic Trust: The form f trust that “does not exclude or deny distrust but rather accepts it… overcomes it” (Flores and Solomon, 1998, p. 213). Hostile Media Phenomenon: The tendency of people to hold personal biases or opinions when assessing the information given through the Media (Ladd, 2009, p. 577).   3 Uses and Gratification Theory: “The main objective of uses and gratification theory is to explain the psychological needs that shape why people use the media and that motivate them to engage in certain media-use behaviors for gratifications that fulfill those intrinsic needs” (Ko, Cho, and Roberts, 2005, p. 58) Organization of Study Chapter 1 contains the background of the problem, purpose of the study and a definition of terms. Chapter 2 will use the literature to identify the state of the relationship between the public and the Media.   4 Chapter 2 Literature Review The review of literature focuses on the existing literature on the public’s perception of the Media, the existence of Media bias and the benefits or consequences of distrusting the Media. Existence of Trust Between the Media and the Public Ladd (2009) and Feldman (2011) both agree upon the existence of the “Hostile Media Phenomenon”. Ladd (2009) defines the phenomenon as “the tendency of people with divergent prior opinions” (p. 577). Feldman’s definition is similar in that it characterizes the phenomenon as the public being “hostile to their own position” (p. 418). Both accounts of the “Hostile Media Phenomenon” flirt with the “Uses and Gratification Theory” – a theory suggesting the public gravitates toward media that have the same or a similar bias to their own; the public is gratified when a news outlet reaffirms their opinions and beliefs. Feldman writes that people tend to be distrusting of the Media by default, “particularly perceptions of the host” (p. 407). In other words, the audience makes up its mind on the credibility of the source depending on who is presenting it. It’s an exercise of ad-hominem nature – discrediting the information being given because it comes from a journalist or pundit whose biases differ from the listener’s. Ladd believes this predisposition from the audience is due to its “increasingly well-documented role of source credibility” (p. 573). Ladd suggests that the everyday   5 person is becoming his or her own fact-checker, and therefore his or her own journalist. Being one’s own journalist is the foundation for predisposed beliefs about current issues and events, making it quite probable that most journalists have accounts of these same issues and events that different from the listener’s. The disparity here establishes “attitudes [that] may have important consequences for… decision-making” (Ladd p. 573). Being unable to decide which media source to believe (because of the confusion brought about by self-reporting) leads to a feeling that all Media contradicts itself, making all journalism seem untrustworthy. The “Hostile Media Phenomenon” is the largest argument the authors give to explain the feeling the public has for the Media. The “Hostile Media Phenomenon” stems from a source of predisposition brought about by the public’s belief that they can act as there own journalists, which creates a natural disdain toward potential Media with conflicting opinions – thus a feeling of distrust. Creating Trust in the Media-Public Relationship According to Flores and Solomon (1998) the conception of a trusting relationship begins when both parties forgo the desire for power and control: “Trust entails lack of control, in that some power is transferred or given up to the person who is trusted” (p. 206). This submission of control can be treacherous, though. As Moehler and Singh (2011) point out, believing large media agencies often lead the gullible public down a path of misinformation and partisanship; a path made thorny by what Flores and Solomon would call a “blind trust, trust without warrant, foolish trust” (p. 206).   6