Bias and impartiality is in the eye of the beholder.
Samuel Johnson
More than 20 years ago, when I started covering town board meetings and writing an occasional feature story, I asked former editor/publisher Mitch Bettis how to keep my reporting free from bias — inserting my own perceptions and beliefs into stories.
His answer surprised me. There will always be bias, he told me, because reporters are human and humans are biased. All humans, no exceptions.
The challenge in journalism is constantly examining our own internal biases and trying to keep them out of our news reporting, while still maintaining our humanity. Sometimes that’s as easy as plucking a piece of broken shell out of the omelette mix. Sometimes it’s like trying to remove the salt from an already baked cake.
Take the oft-used phrase “a good time was had by all” that used to appear at the end of nearly every story in the Herald. Innocuous, right? Maybe, but technically, it’s bias. It’s the reporter’s perception of an event, unless every person present was polled and responded with “I had a good time.” Even something as simple as the use of adjectives and adverbs to describe a scene, a person, or a response, can be construed as bias.
Hindsight can expose unintended bias, too. Over time, additional information that was not available at the time of reporting reveals an entirely different perspective (slant) on a story. It’s like when new evidence comes to light in a criminal case, exonerating the accused after a judge and jury have already passed sentence. This is where our humanity comes in, our judgment, common sense and commitment to the journalism code of ethics in those “gray areas.” We don’t always get it right, but we do our best, because that’s our job.
The recent use of artificial intelligence (AI) to report the news is one attempt to produce completely unbiased journalism. Similar arguments for the use of AI in professions where bias is considered troubling—judges, doctors, police officers, among others—have been presented. So far, these have had mixed results.
This approach reminds me of the movie “Robocop” in which a robot police officer is expected to make completely unbiased judgments about who is the “bad guy” in every situation. As demonstrated in that movie, overcorrecting to prevent bias may be worse than just acknowledging it exists.
Without our humanity, we become algorithmic robots, and we lose something that makes community journalism important and worthwhile.
Take the opinion pages, which are a frequent source of confusion. On these pages, “bias” is not a bug, it’s a feature. We expect our columns and letters to the editor and guest columns to offer a unique, human, and yes, biased, perspective. They are an important part of the “town square” community journalism is designed to serve, and we account for the bias by labeling these pieces as “opinion.” We hope you, dear reader, can recognize and value that distinction.
By NIKI TURNER – editor@editorht1885.com
