Clinton won 56% of the vote in Michigan yesterday, yet several headlines I've read demonstrate bias, "44 Percent Vote Against Clinton", "Clinton 1st in meaningless Democratic race", " Blacks, youngest voters choose 'uncommitted' over Clinton", and the various media sources can't even seem to report consistently how many delegates each one has.
Considering the impact the media has on politics, it's becoming clear that they do exhibit bias and that people should start paying more attention to the candidates who do not receive enough media attention (Edwards & Paul as two examples) and the selection of wording that is hard to ignore the bias in the headlines used.
No comments:
Post a Comment