(MintPress) – In the same media culture where Fox News touts a “Fair and Balanced” slogan, Nation Public Radio (NPR) is steering its vision of news in a different direction. While MSNBC recently adopted its “Lean Forward” slogan in 2011 to suggest more progressive news coverage, NPR is taking fairness out of the equation in favor of focusing on the truth.
The firing of NPR news analyst Juan Williams put the media power in the national spotlight for its questionable ethical practices, which NPR took a hard look at, resulting in a new coverage philosophy that attempts to separate NPR from the competition.
NPR is approaching the issue of “false equivalence” by focusing on listeners’ desire to hear the truth of complex issues, not necessarily every viewpoint on an issue. “False equivalence” refers to the representation of both viewpoints of an issue as being equal, despite the idea that one viewpoint could represent a falsehood of an issue.
In the newly released NPR Ethics Handbook, NPR lays out its plan to focus its media philosophy on clarity and truth within a story, and less about the representation of viewpoints.
“In all our stories, especially matters of controversy, we strive to consider the strongest arguments we can find on all sides, seeking to deliver both nuance and clarity. Our goal is not to please those whom we report on or to produce stories that create the appearance of balance, but to seek the truth,” the handbook says.
This is not to say NPR is eliminating the idea of being fair; it is just being more selective to what it is trying to be fair to – in this case, the truth. NPR suggests that evidence, and not opinion or viewpoints, take precedent in its news coverage.
“At all times, we report for our readers and listeners, not our sources. So our primary consideration when presenting the news is that we are fair to the truth. If our sources try to mislead us or put a false spin on the information they give us, we tell our audience,” according to the handbook. “If the balance of evidence in a matter of controversy weighs heavily on one side, we acknowledge it in our reports. We strive to give our audience confidence that all sides have been considered and represented fairly.”
The fairness doctrine’s demise
Over the past few decades, consumer confidence in the news media has tumbled while criticisms have significantly increased, according to a 2011 Pew Research Center study. The report noted that 77 percent of respondents thought the media tend to favor one side, while another 80 percent thought news organizations were “often influenced by powerful people and organizations.”
Despite the harsh ratings for the media, the study was being conducted during a time when the Fairness Doctrine – a media rule stating that a controversial must be represented by both sides during a broadcast – was in full effect. The doctrine, implemented in 1949 by the Federal Communications Commission, was axed in 2011.
Prior to the doctrine’s demise, critics spoke out against bias seen in the news. A 2004 documentary looked into slanted news coverage reported by Fox News, claiming the cable news station spun the context of its news to appeal to a Republican audience. On the other end of the spectrum, MSNBC has been widely criticized for tweaking its coverage of issues so the station appeals more to a liberal audience.
Detractors of this type of divided political reporting say the viewership of these channels often watch to have their viewpoints of the world validated and not enlightened upon. Former conservative Florida congressman Joe Scarborough, who went to MSNBC to host a morning talk show, says that he is a good example of how polarized politics has become, and that news stations seem to have followed in pursuit.
“I’m just as conservative as I was in 1994, when everyone was calling me a right-wing nut,” Scarborough said. “I think the difference is the Republican Party leaders, a lot of them, have run a bloated government, have been corrupt, and have gone a very, very long way from what we were trying to do in 1994. Also, the Republican Party has just been incompetent.”
Scarborough said he believes MSNBC appears to tilt to the left only because Fox News has gravitated so far to the right. He believes MSNBC is simply a truthful counter to the perceived bias of Fox News.
“While I don’t agree with a lot of the things those guys say night in and night out,” Scarborough said, “I think it’s very important that those disaffected voices have a place to go when they think somebody out there needs to be speaking truth to power.”
The Project for Excellence in Journalism has a nine-point “Principles of Journalism” resource that, in the first point, notes that “journalism’s first obligation is to the truth.” It recognizes that a philosophical or absolute truth on all issues is unattainable for journalists, as it is something that must be verified as diligently as possible.
“This ‘journalistic truth’ is a process that begins with the professional discipline of assembling and verifying facts. Then journalists try to convey a fair and reliable account of their meaning …” the organization notes.
The Juan Williams incident
The Poynter Institute, a non-profit school for journalism in St. Petersburg, Florida, says NPR began the overhaul of its fairness policy shortly after the firing of news analyst Juan Williams near the end of 2010. Williams worked with NPR and appeared on cable newscasts regularly. An appearance on Fox News’ “The O’Reilly Factor,” however, resulted in his termination.
Show host Bill O’Reilly, prior to Williams’ appearance, had made comments about the involvement of Muslims and their responsibility for the 9/11 terrorist attacks. While not necessarily agreeing with O’Reilly, Williams elaborated on his hesitance when he saw a Muslim on a plane.
“Look, Bill, I’m not a bigot. You know the kind of books I’ve written about the civil rights movement in this country,” Williams said. “But when I get on the plane, I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they are identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous.”
NPR said the comments went against its editorial standards and practices and that Williams had tarnished his credibility as a news analyst. From that point, NPR reviewed its ethics handbook and went forward with its new philosophy in bringing fairness to the truth.
“Obviously, we were informed by what happened,” Margaret Low Smith, NPR’s vice president of news, told Poynter of the Williams incident. “I think the question that emerged was: You have these guiding principles, now how do you enforce them and what do you do when things go awry? Putting a process in place makes for better decision-making.”
The plan in action
A Feb. 27th NPR report about the past automaker bailouts and the Republican candidates may have shed light on how NPR puts its new ethical philosophy into action. In the report, presidential candidate Mitt Romney criticized the bailouts by saying United Auto Workers (UAW) took a majority of the equity. Instead of moving forward with the narrative of the story, the reporter corrected Romney’s mistake.
The transcript of the particular portion of the story is as follows:
NPR REPORTER: Mitt Romney, son of former American Motors CEO George Romney, criticized President Barack Obama’s handling of the bailout.
MITT ROMNEY: Instead of going through the normal managed bankruptcy process, he made sure the bankruptcy process ended up with the UAW taking the lion’s share of the equity in the business.
NPR REPORTER: Actually, the U.S. Treasury got most of GM’s equity.
The correction after Romney’s claim shows the reported taking the responsibility among themselves to right a wrong, rather than looking to find an alternative viewpoint that has the potential to either correct Romney’s statement, or skew it even further.
Smith said the new guidelines are the result of a changing media landscape that raises different issues every day. She said there is no catch-all rule that that right the media ship, but notes that improvements must be made on a constant basis.
“We felt strongly that we didn’t want it to be a rule book, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t electric fences you can’t cross,” Smith said. “It’s a little bit like raising children or personnel issues; they come at you differently every time, so you can’t prescribe what the consequences are going to be. What you can do is put a process in place so you can contemplate what you’ve done in the past and try to make sure you’re consistent.”