It's not just the "Fox News Devil": Fighting Bias with Objectivity and Respect for the Reader

            I think at an idea central to this concept is the confirmation bias.  When people look at a source like Fox News (or MSNBC, or the Huffington Post, for that matter), we are looking for information that confirms our current feelings and beliefs.  I would assume that many Fox News viewers do not hold liberal views about policy, the environment, government, or social issues, and that when they see a story on fox News that supports their position, they are more likely to believe it than someone with more moderate views.  I think the idea of “fair and balanced” is more of a spin tactic than a true statement about the nature of Fox News (or any news outlet for that matter)’s reporting.  I think it is tough for a news outlet, whose primary directive is to retain viewers and make money through advertisement and viewership, to actively challenge the viewpoints of its faithful.  When people’s beliefs are challenged, they may be more likely to change the channel, which leads to lost revenue.  Balancing budgets does not make for balanced news, and it’s hardly fair to the viewer when a network’s profit margin is placed above the potential benefit of trying to be as objective as possible.  Unfortunately, anyone who relies exclusively on a major news network for their information is going to be misinformed in some way, whether it’s the fault of simple omissions or getting the news from a source that wants to influence public belief to its agenda. 

            Challenging previously held beliefs is a source of cognitive dissonance, and we know very well that cognitive dissonance is uncomfortable.  But, that’s where the learning happens: at the end of our comfort zones. When our previous beliefs do not “line up” with new information, it is sometimes difficult for us to process.  When our beliefs are challenged, it sometimes sets off a train of re-evaluation; “Does my change of belief on this subject affect my other ideas about the world?”        

            An example could be challenging the belief that climate change is not a potentially disastrous global problem.  Perhaps if someone were to challenge that belief, they would be able to challenge others as well.  Challenging the beliefs about climate change could lead people to challenge and perhaps change their ideas about leading sustainable lives, driving their cars less or carpooling, using more energy efficient appliances, and perhaps even joining advocacy groups to increase awareness in their neighborhoods.

            The willingness to challenge those long held beliefs is the key, and this brings me back to one of my first posts.  When individuals are willing to challenge their previous beliefs, they often adopt a new belief in its place.  Our job as science writers is to make science and information accessible to those who wish to challenge their views or replace antiquated ones.  When we make the information accessible and clear in a way that doesn’t alienate or belittle those with different views, we are ensuring that individuals who wish to change their views will feel like they are accessing objective, meaningful information.  We need to make the information available to those people who want to change, and it is our responsibility to be the most objective writers we possibly can to ensure that our readers (and potential “converts”) are getting the most unbiased information we can give.