How much should the public believe from what they read in newspapers or hear on television? Someone ought to keep track. What was the “expose” that was done a few years ago on a certain vehicle that was supposed to demonstrate how unsafe it was? And then we found out that the vehicles were all right; the evidence had been tampered with. And then there were those shocking revelations about the grocery chain, Food Lion, in which the reporter again rigged the evidence.
Earlier this month we heard about the Ponder 7th-grader, who was arrested and kept in the Denton County Jail for 5 days because of an essay he wrote. The essay was read over the airwaves on various talk shows, and many lamented that the lad received the grade of 100 for concocting such a rambling story, replete with numerous misspelled words and run-on sentences. It is true that the facts of the matter have been made public, but clarifications seldom receive the attention that the original story commands.
The facts are these: The teacher began the story; the assignment, then, was for each student to envision and write a conclusion. The project was worth 300 points. 100 points was given for reading the story to the class. Another possible 100 points could be earned for listening attentively to other students read their stories (of which the boy in question received 50 points). The final 100 points was for content and grammatical skills, but this grade was to be given only after the teacher’s recommendations for revision. At the time of the arrest, that grade had not been determined. Obviously, whoever reported that the boy received 100 for his work missed a few facts.
Why was the youngster jailed? The story mentioned shooting fellow students; according to the law, the shooting of fellow students must be reported to the police, which was done. To make matters worse, the author of the “story” had been in a fight with one of the students who was shot (fictionally). His parents brought pressure to bear on the police, and they came to the school and arrested the youth.
Although the assignment is a good one, the students should not be allowed to read their stories without the teacher having first seen what they wrote. This constitutes questionable judgment on the part of the teacher–even if she had done so in her classes for a number of years without any previous incidents. It should be fundamental that anything that is presented to students has adult approval first.
For several days, however, the news media had created a false impression that the teacher thought this was a great literary effort on behalf of the beleaguered boy when such was not the case at all. Who investigated the facts here and sent a garbled version of them all over the country, thus making all of us victims of misinformation? Was it done intentionally, or was it just sloppy reporting? If the former option occurred, what was the goal; if the latter, how could anyone do such a poor job? Actually, it is not uncommon to find inaccuracies in newspapers. Periodically, one finds a letter to the editor correcting something that was falsely reported. Or the reader may find a brief apology to someone tucked away somewhere on page 37. Does the necessity of meeting deadlines explain the occasional problems?
We could chalk up erroneous data to the daily time constraints that editors face, but perhaps there is another force at work: The media no longer cares about the facts! In common parlance, the saying is: “Perception is reality.” This tenet is the underlying principle of SPIN. If the facts cannot be denied outright, at least we can manipulate how people react to the facts.
Take, for example, the new millennium. It does not start in the year 2000. Factually, it begins January 1, 2001. The reason is that when the calendar was devised, it began with the year 1. Therefore a decade does not pass until the conclusion of the year 10. A century has not elapsed until the year 100 comes to a close. A millennium is not completed until 1000 years have come and gone.
Are facts important? The perception is that the next thousand years begins with 2000; who cares if the reality declares it to be 2001? Marilyn Vos Savant acknowledged in Parade that the date of the new millennium is 2001, but then she asked her readers if they wanted to quibble about technicalities or celebrate. This is precisely the point: Truth is irrelevant. The way we perceive something to be is the way it really is.
Not only have facts become irrelevant to the news media; they are also biased. Virtually hundreds of examples could be cited, but consider a current issue. What perception has been presented lately concerning Pat Buchanan (this is not an effort for or against him as a candidate for president)? What has descended from talk shows and newspaper columnists is that he has a Nazi mentality, is anti-Semitic, and a Hitler-lover. These charges are more than preposterous, but the perception is slowing becoming the reality. He made some comments in his newest book that praised Hitler as a strategist. Buchanan divorced Hitler’s abilities from his character and from the evil that he did, not unlike Jesus’ commendation of the unjust steward (Luke 16: 8). What was not reported was that when Buchanan did describe his moral character, he called him “a monster.” Has anyone heard that fact reported?
So what’s the point? Is the purpose of this article to call for reforms in the media? No, the media will remain biased. The point is that we should not rely on the news media for factual information. As already shown, they report the “news” with their own slant. So much happens in the world everyday that they can choose what they want to use and ignore what they please. Furthermore, they can play fast and loose with the facts, as it suits their own purposes. If they can create a controversy that captures the public’s fancy, it does not matter whether the basis for it is perception or reality.
A firsthand experience will demonstrate that not only is the above-described philosophy true on the national level, it is practiced on the local as well.
Over a decade ago there was a push in the Peoria (Illinois) area for school-based clinics. A city councilman, who shared the same name as our 11th President, James K. Polk, claimed that the infant mortality rate in Peoria was 22.9%, one of the highest in the nation, because young girls were not getting the right kind of care while they were pregnant. He made a very passionate and emotional plea for the school-based clinics, which he asserted would alleviate this problem.
The concept of school-based clinics was billed as a health service, but their real function was to distribute condoms and various birth control devices. Parents, of course, would probably not have any idea that their children would be influenced toward having sex by authority figures. A number of us gathered together to fight the proposal for the clinics.
Having been intrigued by the infant mortality claim, I decided to check out the figures of the councilman. After all, if nearly one child in four were dying in the Peoria area, one would have thought such a story would have been newsworthy. Also, it did not square with reality. I checked with the County Health Department. The deaths in the Peoria area were not 22.9 per hundred. The statistics are given in terms of thousands. The correct figure was 22.9 per thousand, which amounted to 2.29%. The councilman simply failed to read the statistics accurately.
At the next school board meeting, when the same claim was made again, I was able to be recognized and gave the factual information. A lot of eyebrows were raised, but the conversation turned to other subjects. The next day the newspaper gave a summary of this meeting. Part of the story was “Polk said…”; the other part was “Summers said….” “What’s going on?” I wondered. I had no intention of setting myself up as an authority; they were not my statistics. Anyone had access to them. I had naively assumed that a reporter would check the information and publish the truth. Instead they checked with Polk, who said he would stand by his original statement.
So I invited the reporter to accompany me on a field trip to the County Health Department, showed him the statistics, and asked if they would print the correct information for the public. He said they would probably not. And they did not. What other conclusion can be drawn but that: the newspaper, the Journal Star in this instance, did not care about getting the factual information to the concerned citizenry of Peoria; they were more interested in keeping the controversy in the realm of opinion.
Proverbs 18:17 wisely states: “The first one to plead his cause seems right, until his neighbor comes and examines him.” The news media frequently presents only one side of an issue with little regard for the facts; the public should be skeptical and demand verification.