THE LATEST DOCUMENT DUMP OF CONVICTED SEX OFFENDER JEFFREY EPSTEIN’S EMAILS HAS GIVEN US PLENTY OF EXAMPLES TO SHOW YOU IN TERMS OF MEDIA BIAS –
WHILE SOME EXAMPLES ARE SUBTLE, OTHERS ARE PRETTY EASILY SPOTTED ATTEMPTS TO SWAY A NARRATIVE TO FIT ONE AGENDA OR ANOTHER.
POLITICAL OPINIONS ARE PRETTY STRONG OVER EPSTEIN AND HOW THE GOVERNMENT IS HANDLING THE CASE.
AND AS YOU’RE ABOUT TO SEE – THERE’S A WAY TO FRAME THE FACTS OF THIS STORY THAT’S BENEFICIAL FOR BOTH THE POLITICAL LEFT AND THE POLITICAL RIGHT. TODAY, WE’RE GOING TO SHOW YOU JUST HOW RIGHT AND LEFT-LEANING MEDIA OUTLETS DO IT..
WE’LL BE BRINGING IN ANOTHER GUEST IN THIS WEEK’S EPISODE TO HELP US FURTHER PEEL BACK THE MEDIA’S FLAWS IN COVERAGE.
WELCOME BACK TO BIAS BREAKDOWN.
HERE’S THE LATEST STIR UP IN A NUTSHELL.
HOUSE DEMOCRATS RELEASED THREE SCREENSHOTS OF EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN JEFFREY EPSTEIN, GISLAINE MAXWELL, AND WRITER MICHAEL WOLFF.
HOURS LATER – THE REPUBLICAN-LED HOUSE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE RELEASED ANOTHER 20 THOUSAND PAGES OF EPSTEIN DOCUMENTS.
THESE ARE THE FILES THAT CREATED A FLURRY OF HEADLINES –
WITH LEFT AND RIGHT LEANING MEDIA REPORTING THE FACTS IN TOTALLY CONTRASTING WAYS – A DUEL OVER CONTROL OF THE NARRATIVE.
HERE’S SOME EXAMPLES.
A LEFT-LEANING HEADLINE FROM AL JAZEERA HIGHLIGHTED THIS QUOTE FROM ONE OF THE EMAILS RELEASED FIRST BY HOUSE DEMOCRATS – AN EMAIL THAT ALLEGED “TRUMP SPENT HOURS WITH VICTIM AT EPSTEIN’S HOUSE.”
BUT A RIGHT-LEANING HEADLINE FROM THE NEW YORK POST – HIGHLIGHTED THE WHITE HOUSE’S **RESPONSE TO THAT RELEASED EMAIL.
REVEALING THE “REDACTED VICTIM” WAS “VIRGINIA GIUFFRE”
SOMEONE WHO “ALWAYS SAID TRUMP NEVER DID ANYTHING WRONG.”
IT’S THE SAME SENTENCE FROM AN EMAIL, SAME STORY – BUT FRAMED IN TWO DIFFERENT WAYS.
IT FIT A BROADER TREND AMONG NEWS OUTLETS AND THE PERSPECTIVES HIGHLIGHTED IN HEADLINES BY EACH PARTISAN SIDE.
TAKE THESE HEADLINES FROM LEFT-LEANING OUTLETS.
THESE ARE EXAMPLES OF OUTLETS EMPHASIZING QUOTES FROM THE EMAILS AND EPSTEIN – TYING THE SEX OFFENDER TO TRUMP.
BUT THEN TAKE THESE HEADLINES FROM RIGHT-LEANING NEWS ORGANIZATIONS –
THESE ARE EXAMPLES OF OUTLETS EMPHASIZING QUOTES FROM THE WHITE HOUSE AND TRUMP – MINIMIZING THE EMAILS OR TIES TO EPSTEIN.
WE’RE BRINGING MEDIA WATCHDOG GROUP “ALLSIDES” BACK INTO OUR CONVERSATION THIS WEEK TO FURTHER TALK ABOUT THIS MEDIA DIVIDE IN STORY FRAMING OF EPSTEIN.
WE SENT OVER SEVERAL STORIES AND TOGETHER WITH ALLSIDES’ EDITOR IN CHIEF “HENRY A BRECHTER” – WE BROKE DOWN DIFFERENT TYPES OF BIASES IN THE MEDIA’S REPORTING.
STARTING WITH HOW SOME OUTLETS ARE **SLANTING AND ***SPINNING THE STORY.
There’s a ton of different bias at play here. Narratives are being slanted to favor one side or the other, THAT’S WHAT YOU SEE when a particular piece of content is just focused on quotes from trump or just focused on quotes from the emails. and epstein and interpretation of emails from democrats or otherwise. so that’s definitely examples of both slant and spin, the sort of manipulation and framing of a narrative in such a way that puts down the other side of the argument.”
IT WASN’T JUST HEADLINES THAT WOULD READ IN CONTRAST OF ONE ANOTHER.
BUT TAKE COVERAGE FROM MSNBC ON THE LEFT AND THE DAILY WIRE ON THE RIGHT –
THE HEADLINES READ SIMILARLY TO EACH OTHER – HIGHLIGHTING ANOTHER PORTION OF AN EPSTEIN EMAIL THAT ALLEGED TRUMP “KNEW ABOUT THE GIRLS.”
BUT THE STORY IS TOLD VERY DIFFERENTLY WITHIN THE ARTICLES.
MSNBC STARTED THE STORY WITH MULTIPLE EPSTEIN EMAIL QUOTES – THEN SUMMED UP THE EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE AS EVIDENCE THAT “UNDERCUTS THE PRESIDENT’S ATTEMPTS TO DISTANCE HIMSELF FROM EPSTEIN.”
THE WHITE HOUSE’S RESPONSE – IS IN THE LAST PARAGRAPH.
WHEREAS TAKE THE DAILY WIRE’S REPORT – AND THE WHITE HOUSE’S RESPONSE IS IN THE **FIRST PARAGRAPH – CALLING IT A “FAKE NARRATIVE” AND “SMEAR”.
THEIR LAST PARAGRAPH STARTS WITH TRUMP “NOT BEING ACCUSED OF ANY WRONGDOING.”
SO IT WAS THE SAME STORY – NEARLY IDENTICAL HEADLINES – BUT
THESE OUTLETS FAVORED ONE POLITICAL PERSPECTIVE OVER THE OTHER – EVIDENT IN HOW THEY PRIORITIZED CERTAIN QUOTES AND VOICES.
WHICH IS ANOTHER FORM OF MEDIA BIAS BY VIEWPOINT PLACEMENT.
“I think this is a good example of viewpoint placement where you know its one thing to not cover a viewpoint at all. If its straight up left out of the conversation all together. Viewpoint placement might be harder to spot sometimes. That’s when they do cover perspectives but in an imbalanced way.”
IT’S NOT JUST PERSPECTIVES OR INTERPRETATION OF THE FACTS THAT READ DIFFERENTLY AMONG LEFT AND RIGHT NEWS OUTLETS.
BUT THE FACTS THEMSELVES CAN BE CONSTRUED.
THERE IS A DISCHARGE PETITION IN THE HOUSE THAT JUST RECEIVED ENOUGH VOTES TO FORCE HOUSE SPEAKER MIKE JOHNSON TO CALL FOR A VOTE ON THE EPSTEIN FILES’ RELEASE.
OUT OF 217 SIGNATURES ONLY THESE FOUR REPUBLICANS PUT THEIR NAME ON THAT PETITION TO CALL FOR A VOTE.
THERE WERE REPORTS CIRCULATING THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP SPOKE WITH BOEBERT AND NANCY MACE REGARDING THEIR SIGNATURES ON THE PETITION.
IT WAS FRAMED BY LEFT-LEANING AXIOS AS TRUMP “PRESSURING” LAUREN BOEBERT AND NANCY MACE.
BUT RIGHT-LEANING WASHINGTON EXAMINER REPORTED “THERE WAS “NO PRESSURE” PUT ON THE CONGRESSWOMAN WHO SPOKE WITH TRUMP ABOUT THE EPSTEIN FILES.
This is once again a reflection of the narratives and sort of the narrow focus from the left side of the media and the right side of the media on this. I think the Washington Examiner article was actually quoting Boebert herself saying that there was no pressure placed on her by Trump to remove her name. Like she denied those reports wholeheartedly. Meanwhile, from the left. I think at least from this Axios article that I looked at earlier, it was based on anonymous sources who said that Boebert had been pressured.
When the headlines are in such direct opposition from different sides of the media on a story like this, it shows that outlets are, unfortunately, a lot of news outlets and journalists are more focused on appeasing and appealing to their base rather than appealing to a diverse audience.
TWO MORE QUICK EXAMPLES FOR YOU OF HOW MEDIA FRAMING MATTERS.
THEN – THE POLITICAL ANALYSIS BEHIND **WHY THESE PARTISAN PATTERNS IN EPSTEIN COVERAGE PERSIST.
FIRST – POLITICO ON THE LEFT – A HEADLINE THAT READS “Latest Epstein files knock White House on its heels.”
“Right away that headline is framing the white house as being on the defense, unstable and unsteady.”
THE POLITICO WRITER DESCRIBES THE EMAILS AS “the latest blow to a White House already reeling.”
“Subjective qualifying adjectives like that are something that we see used a lot.”
AND POLITICO WRITES THE EMAIL REVELATION FOLLOWED “a brutal week for President Donald Trump” – EVEN THOUGH SIX PARAGRAPHS DOWN THEY QUOTE WHITE HOUSE OFFICIALS WHO PUSHED BACK AGAINST THEIR OWN CHARACTERIZATION. White House aides push back on the idea they suffered defeats.
Politico describes Trump’s week as brutal. That’s a very subjective assessment.
To reach for such a subjective qualification like that is a just clear-cut example of bias, something that we point out a lot.
THEN THERE’S THIS ARTICLE FROM NEWSMAX ON THE RIGHT.
“TRUMP BLASTS DEMS’ EPSTEIN EMAIL “DEFLECTIONS.”
It leads with that charged adjective “blasts” and it also uses a quote from trump calling them deflections. It does seem like newsmax is endorsing his point of view.
NEWSMAX DESCRIBES TRUMP AS “COMING OUT SWINGING” IN RESPONSE TO THE EPSTEIN EMAILS.
That sort of frames him as on the attack against unjust criticism.
AND THROUGHOUT THE ARTICLE – ONLY TRUMP AND THE WHITE HOUSE ARE QUOTED.
At AllSides, our position is you cna’t claim to understand an issue if you can’t articulate the side of an argument you disagree with.
If a perspective is omitted entirely from a story that is an egregious example of bias.
SO WHY DO WE SEE THIS SORT OF QUITE FRANKLY OBVIOUS DIVIDE IN HOW THE MEDIA IS COVERING THIS STORY?
THERE’S A LOT OF DIFFERENT ANGLES TO TAKE –
BUT THERE ARE PARTISAN PATTERNS IN WHAT VOICES TO AMPLIFY AND WHAT INFORMATION TO SHOWCASE.
HENRY HAS THIS EXPLANATION AND ANALYSIS TO OFFER AS TO WHY LEFT AND RIGHT MEDIA ARE CHOOSING TO COVER EPSTEIN THE WAY THAT THEY ARE.
“Already on this story you’re seeing two distinct camps form in the media coverage. One is yes, definitely seems like trump is involved, seems like these emails are credible evidence of that. And the other camp is the exact opposite, doesn’t seem like he’s involved, doesn’t seem like the emails are credible. Within either of those camps is very little room for nuance or a comprehensive look at the different opinion.
Outlets on the left know that their audience is generally going to be more likely to want to criticize Trump or find evidence that Trump did something wrong with this story. So it’s natural that they would focus on the critics of Trump. the right, exact opposite is true. They know their audience is looking for information that absolves Trump. So if they can lead with his defenses or evidence that goes against what Democrats are presenting, they’re going to lead with that. And that’s when you start dealing with, like I said earlier, these different truths and real extreme polarization on an issue where seemingly there’s like no common solution to be had.
THE MEDIA IS AWARE OF THE CURRENT LANDSCAPE.
AND LEFT AND RIGHT MEDIA OFTEN TRY TO CRITICIZE THE OPPOSING SIDE’S COVERAGE.
NPR CRITICIZED RIGHT-WING MEDIA’S COVERAGE, DESCRIBING IT AS “SHRUGGING OFF” THE STORY.
MEANWHILE, THE DAILY WIRE WAS CRITICAL OF LEGACY OUTLETS — POINTING TO BILL O’REILLY’S CLAIM THAT MAINSTREAM MEDIA OMITTED TESTIMONY FROM EPSTEIN ATTORNEY ALAN DERSHOWITZ THAT EXONERATES PRESIDENT TRUMP.
HENRY SAYS THIS SORT OF STORYTELLING IN THE FORM OF FINGERPOINTING SAYS A LOT ABOUT THE CURRENT CLIMATE.
It’s unfortunately illustrative of just how combative all of politics is. And now it’s sort of seeped its way.into the media circulation and into how people read about issues and learn about issu es. And that’s more of that vicious cycle of constant negativity focused on enemies covering that, encouraging readers to engage with that. And then readers become more more polarized and less open to discussions with people that they disagree with, less open to, you know, the core functions of a healthy democracy and a healthy society.
AND THAT’S YOUR BIAS BREAKDOWN.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR WATCHING THIS WEEK’S EPISODE ALL THE WAY TO THE END!
THIS IS A BIG STORY WITH A LOT OF PUBLIC INTEREST — AND THERE SHOULD BE
PLENTY OF UPDATES AS THE WEEK PROGRESSES.
THE HOUSE IS EXPECTED TO TAKE ITS VOTE ON THE EPSTEIN FILES, AND PRESIDENT TRUMP IS NOW CALLING ON HIS PARTY TO SUPPORT THE RELEASE OF ALL FILES.
HE’S ALSO CALLING FOR SEVERAL EPSTEIN-RELATED INVESTIGATIONS.
SO IT’S LIKELY THIS STORY WILL STAY IN THE NEWS CYCLE FOR WEEKS — MAYBE EVEN MONTHS.
AS YOU CONTINUE TO FOLLOW COVERAGE ON THIS SUBJECT, HOPEFULLY YOU’LL KEEP SOME OF THE TALKING POINTS FROM TODAY IN MIND — TO SPOT POTENTIAL MEDIA BIAS AND APPROACH THE STORY WITH A CRITICAL EYE.
A BIG THANK YOU TO HENRY FOR TAKING THE TIME TO TALK WITH US ABOUT THIS COMPLEX STORY AND FOR HELPING IDENTIFY THE MEDIA NARRATIVES AND SPIN!
IF YOU MISSED LAST WEEK’S EPISODE, BE SURE TO FIND OUR PODCAST ON ANY OF YOUR FAVORITE PODCAST PLATFORMS.
THERE YOU CAN CATCH OUR STORY ON NIGERIA — AND HOW THE MEDIA IS CHERRY-PICKING DATA ON CHRISTIAN DEATHS.
WE HAD JULIE FROM ALLSIDES HELP US BREAK DOWN THE COVERAGE AND EXPLAIN THE LEFT AND RIGHT MEDIA NARRATIVES IN THAT STORY.
IF YOU’RE WATCHING ME NOW ON EITHER SPOTIFY OR YOUTUBE – THEN HELP ME OUT – GIVE US A LIKE – AND LEAVE ME A QUICK COMMENT!
GIVE ME YOUR THOUGHTS ON THE MEDIA YOU’VE BEEN CONSUMING OVER THIS EPSTEIN STORY. AND IF YOU’VE ALREADY NOTICED SOME OF THESE PARTISAN PATTERNS IN YOUR OWN NEWS CONSUMPTION.
THANK YOU TO IAN KENNEDY OUR VIDEO EDITOR.
AND ALI CALDWELL ON OUR GRAPHICS.
AGAIN – THANKS TO HENRY FOR SHARING YOUR PERSPECTIVE WITH US ON THIS WEEK’S EPISODE.
AND THANK YOU FOR WATCHING!
I’LL SEE YA NEXT TIME!
