[Karah Rucker]
HEY WELCOME BACK TO BIAS BREAKDOWN –
TODAY – LET’S TALK – ABOUT TEXAS.
“Texas state republicans today unveiling their proposal for this new congressional map.”
TEXAS IS LOOKING TO REDRAW ITS CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT MAP IN A SPECIAL SESSION.
BUT THE VOTE TO APPROVE ITS NEW MAP – IS BEING HELD UP BY STATE DEMOCRATS.
unless there’s a quorum of at least two-thirds of all members in attendance, the state house can’t hold any votes. That’s why texas democrats packed their bags and left texas.”
WHAT STARTED IN TEXAS IS NOW SPARKING A NATIONWIDE SHOWDOWN.
the texas tribune has new reporting on california governor gavin newsom has told aides he will move forward with a plan to redraw his states congressional lines.”
“there are states that are now looking at potentially changing their maps. You heard jeffries refer to new york, but also new jersey. W’er hearing about minnesota, and washington state. California is at the core of this too.”
YOU WANT THE FACTS.
WHAT’S ALL THE FUSS ABOUT IN TEXAS? HOW DOES IT IMPACT ME?
WHEN PEOPLE ARE WANTING ANSWERS – AND RELIABLE INFORMATION –
THE NEWS IS SUPPOSED TO BE A VALUABLE RESOURCE.
THAT’S WHEN OUR JOBS BECOME most IMPORTANT.
BUT MEDIA BIAS HAS TAINTED PEOPLE’S PERCEPTION OF THE NEWS.
AND AS YOU’RE ABOUT TO SEE – YOU WOULDN’T BE WRONG TO FEEL JADED BY PARTISAN NEWS OUTLETS.
YOU’RE ABOUT TO SEE A SLEW OF media bias SURROUNDING THIS REDISTRICTING FIGHT – THAT MIGHT MAKE YOU THINK TWICE ABOUT YOUR NEWS CONSUMPTION HABITS.
LET’S GO AHEAD AND LAY OUT A FEW OF THE DIVERGING NARRATIVES –
THEN GET INTO THE MEDIA BIAS SPECIFICS.
LET’S START WITH WHAT LEFT-LEANING MEDIA WANT YOU TAKE AWAY FROM WHAT’S HAPPENING IN TEXAS.
THEY ARE AMPLIFYING THE ARGUMENTS **AGAINST TEXAS REDRAWING ITS DISTRICT LINES.
CRITICIZING IT AS GERRYMANDERING – OR RIGGING THE MAP IN THE PARTY’S FAVOR.
“i think if things continue the way they are we’ll have a heavily gerrymandered state”
“yeah, this is an existential crisis for our democracy”
“I think, i think it’s crazy.”
“i think donald trump is trying to steal the election.”
VOICES ON RIGHT-LEANING NETWORKS ARE DEFENDING THE REDISTRICTING EFFORTS — MOCKING DEMOCRATS’ WALKOUT STRATEGY AS “POLITICAL THEATER” AND ACCUSE **BLUE STATES OF GERRYMANDERING.
and now – runaway drama queens.
this is all the democrats have. Stunts, play acting, and tantrums for tiktok.”
“let us be clear here, these elected democrats are wasting valuable taxpayer money and time for yet another staged political stunt that will ultimately change nothing.”
“put the map back up of illinois. That looks like an earthworm on lsd.”
if you look at the map of illinois, republicans won in about 47% of the popular vote in 2024 but they only hold 17% of the seats.”
SO YOU HAVE AN IDEA OF THE NARRATIVES from LEFT AND RIGHT MEDIA – TELLING THE STORY WITH THE GOAL OF CONVINCING YOU ONE POLITICAL SIDE IS RIGHT – AND THE OTHER – IS WRONG.
NOW LET’S LOOK DEEPER INTO A FEW WRITE UPS ON THE STORY.
AND PINPOINT THE MEDIA BIAS.
AND TALK ABOUT IT.
FIRST — WE HAVE THIS FROM THE NEW YORK TIMES.
A NEWS OUTLET ON THE LEFT.
AND YOU DON’T HAVE TO LOOK FAR TO FIND OUR FIRST FORM OF BIAS.
“BIAS BY SUBJECTIVE QUALIFYING ADJECTIVES” AS IDENTIFIED BY MEDIA WATCHDOG GROUPS –
BUT IN OTHER MORE SIMPLE WORDS – IT’S AN ADJECTIVE THAT IS BASED ON OPINION.
IT CASTS A CERTAIN JUDGMENT ON WHATEVER THE ADJECTIVE IS BEING USED TO DESCRIBE.
IN THIS CASE – THE TIMES CALLS THE NEW MAP “GERRYMANDERED” IN ITS HEADLINE – THE TIMES IS OFFERING THE LEFT’S **OPINION ON THE TEXAS MAP.
THAT TERM IMPLIES THAT TEXAS MANIPULATED AND UNFAIRLY REDREW ITS MAPS.
WHEN REALLY – IT’S THE OPINION OF THOSE ON THE LEFT – THAT TEXAS IS ATTEMPTING TO “GERRYMANDER.” THOSE ON THE RIGHT – LARGELY AREN’T SAYING THE MAP IS GERRYMANDERED.
YET THE TIMES CHOSE TO AMPLIFY THE LEFT’S PERCEPTION –
WITHOUT ATTRIBUTION.
IF THE TIMES WERE TO SAY “DEMOCRATS SAY THE HOUSE MAP IS GERRYMANDERED –
THEN – IT’S FAIR GAME.
WITHOUT ATTRIBUTION – THE TIMES INSERTS ITS OWN OPINION INTO THE STORY RIGHT AWAY.
LET’S STAY ON THE HEADLINE FOR A MOMENT LONGER.
“TEXAS REPUBLICANS UNVEIL GERRYMANDERED HOUSE MAP –
***TRYING TO PLEASE TRUMP.
THIS LAST ADDED BIT TO THE HEADLINE – IS ALSO BIASED.
BIAS BY “MIND-READING.”
MORE SIMPLY PUT – THE TIMES IS MAKING ASSUMPTIONS AND SPECULATING THAT TEXAS REPUBLICANS ARE DOING THIS JUST TO PLEASE TRUMP.
THE TIMES – PROMOTED THE LEFT’S OPINION.
DEMOCRATS SAY THE GOP IS ONLY DOING THIS BECAUSE TRUMP SAID SO.
BUT REPUBLICANS AREN’T SAYING “THIS IS FOR TRUMP.”
IN FACT, THE TIMES EVEN CITES AN ABBOTT INTERVIEW WHERE HE EMPHASIZED THAT THE DECISION HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH TRUMP.
SO THE TIMES WAS MAKING **ASSUMPTIONS – OR “MIND READING” – NOT BASED ON FACTS. BUT BASED ON POLITICAL OPINION.
**HEADLINES ARE IMPORTANT TO TALK ABOUT.
BECAUSE AS I’VE MENTIONED BEFORE ON OUR SHOW –
STUDIES HAVE SHOWN WHEN IT COMES TO CONSUMING THE NEWS, UP TO 75 PERCENT OF PEOPLE DON’T CLICK PASSED THE HEADLINE.
I FEEL LIKE I SHOULD PAUSE A MINUTE SO WE CAN FULLY DIGEST THAT.
THAT WOULD MEAN FOR MOST OF THE PEOPLE WHO SAW THIS STORY –
THEY DIDN’T LOOK PAST THE HEADLINE.
INSTEAD THEY TOOK THE TIMES AT FACE VALUE – WITH MEDIA BIASES EMBEDDED IN BOLD FONT.
READERS WEREN’T GETTING THE FACTS. THEY WERE FED A LEFT PERSPECTIVE OVER THE ISSUE — **PRESENTED AS FACT.
BUT LET’S SAY YOU’RE PART OF THE 25 PERCENT –
WHO ACTUALLY CLICKED THE TIMES’ ARTICLE AND READ IT THROUGH.
YOU’D FIND ANOTHER FORM OF MEDIA BIAS WITHIN THE ARTICLE.
BIAS BY VIEWPOINT OMISSION.
THE TIMES – QUOTED **SEVEN VOICES **AGAINST TEXAS REDISTRICTING.
THE TIMES QUOTED **ONE VOICE **FOR IT – WITH ONE QUOTE FROM THE GOVERNOR.
THE TIMES IS LARGELY “OMITTING VOICES AND PERSPECTIVES ON THE OTHER SIDE” OF THE ARGUMENT.
“BIAS BY OMISSION CAN OCCUR WHEN THERE IS UNEQUAL COVERAGE ON ONE SIDE.”
IT’S TYPICALLY NOT NORMAL READING BEHAVIOR TO KEEP A TALLY ON HOW MANY POLITICAL PERSPECTIVES WERE SHARED.
SO FOR SOME READERS HERE –
THE LACK OF PERSPECTIVE FROM THE OTHER POLITICAL SIDE COULD PERSUADE THEM TO AGREE WITH ONE OF THE SEVEN VOICES THEY HEARD AGAINST THE REDISTRICTING.
REALLY ALL OF THESE THINGS ARE BASIC RULES OF JOURNALISM.
BE CAREFUL WHEN USING SUBJECTIVE ADJECTIVES – AND ITS LARGELY BEST TO AVOID THEM ALTOGETHER.
IF THERE’S AN OPINION STATEMENT IN YOUR STORY, IT BETTER BE ATTRIBUTED TO SOMEBODY ELSE.
AND OFFER EQUAL…**BALANCED COVERAGE.
SO JUST AS I’M PREACHING THAT HERE – LET’S FLIP THE SCRIPT.
TO BALANCE MY OWN STORY OUT HERE –
IT’S TIME TO LOOK INTO A **RIGHT NEWS OUTLET’S COVERAGE OF THE STORY.
THE NEW YORK POST WROTE “KATHY HOCHUL WELCOMES TEXAS DEMS IN “REDISTRICTING PUBLICITY STUNT” TO **JAB TRUMP.”
THE POST ACCUSES THE NEW YORK GOVERNOR AND DEMOCRATS OF BEING INVOLVED IN A PUBLICITY STUNT.
THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF MEDIA BIAS BY PRESENTING OPINION STATEMENTS AS FACT.
IT’S A PERSONAL OPINION OF **REPUBLICANS THAT DEMOCRATS FLEEING TEXAS OR THE PRESSER WITH HOCHUL IS ALL A PUBLICITY STUNT.
SO THAT STATEMENT IS “BASED ON PERSONAL OPINION AND ASSUMPTION.”
IT’S NOT OBJECTIVE OR A FACT. HOCHUL AND OTHER DEMOCRATS WOULDN’T CALL IT A STUNT.
SO THE POST IS OFFERING A RIGHT-PERSPECTIVE RIGHT OFF THE BAT.
STAYING ON THE HEADLINE –
SAYING HOCHUL DID THIS TO TAKE A **JAB AT TRUMP –
IS AN EXAMPLE OF “SENSATIONALISM” – ANOTHER FORM OF BIAS.
THE WORD “JAB” IS A STRONG, SENSATIONALIZED WORD CHOICE THAT PROVOKES EMOTION OUT OF READERS – IT’S A MORE DRAMATIC TERM THAN A MORE NEUTRAL DESCRIPTOR WOULD BE.
IT’S AN EXAMPLE OF “SHOCKING OR EXAGGERATED LANGUAGE.”
WHILE HOCHUL DID MENTION TRUMP ABOUT A DOZEN TIMES DURING HER PRESS CONFERENCE – SAYING SHE WAS TAKING JABS – IS SENSATIONALIST..
SO AGAIN – IF SOMEONE WERE TO ONLY READ THE NEWS HEADLINE –
THEY ARE ALREADY GETTING A BIASED VIEW OF HOCHUL’S PRESSER –
BY STATING OPINIONS AS FACT AND USING OVERDRAMATIC LANGUAGE TO STOKE EMOTION.
THEN — IF YOU READ THROUGH THE POST’S COVERAGE — YOU’LL NOTICE SELECTIVE REPORTING.
HOCHUL SAID HER STATE IS NOW LOOKING AT REDISTRICTING, TOO, WHICH THE POST FRAMES AS A RETALIATORY STUNT AGAINST TEXAS. BUT THE PAPER FAILS TO EXPLAIN WHY NEW YORK IS CONSIDERING THE MOVE IN THE FIRST PLACE.
WHAT’S MISSING?
THE FACT THAT TEXAS’ NEW MAP COULD NET THE G-O-P FIVE ADDITIONAL HOUSE SEATS —
A CENTRAL MOTIVATION BEHIND NEW YORK’S RESPONSE.
BY LEAVING OUT THAT KEY CONTEXT, THE POST ENGAGES IN BIAS BY OMISSION OF INFORMATION — EXCLUDING A CRITICAL FACT THAT WOULD HELP EXPLAIN THE OTHER SIDE’S POINT OF VIEW AND ACTIONS.
SO WHAT ARE SOME OF THE KEY FACTS TO THE STORY?
ON JULY NINTH – GOVERNOR ABBOTT ANNOUNCED THE STATE’S SPECIAL SESSION AGENDA.
ON IT – REDISTRICTING.
SAYING TEXAS NEEDS A REVISED MAP “IN LIGHT OF CONSTITUTIONAL CONCERNS RAISED BY THE DOJ.”
THE DOJ SENT THIS LETTER TO ABBOTT ON JULY 7TH –
LISTING FOUR TEXAS DISTRICTS THAT IT DEEMED “UNCONSTITUTIONAL COALITION DISTRICTS”
AND “URGING THE STATE OF TEXAS” TO RECTIFY THE MAP.
Since the last time we did redistricting, the law has changed.”
it says that coalition districts are no longer required. So we want to make sure our maps don’t impose coalition districts.”
ON JULY 15TH –
PRESIDENT TRUMP WAS ASKED ABOUT TEXAS REDISTRICTING –
VOICING SUPPORT FOR A REDRAWING –
AND SAID THERE WOULD BE A PATH FOR TEXAS REPUBLICANS TO PICK UP FIVE EXTRA HOUSE SEATS.
“How many more seats do you want the republicans to draw? Five.
“texas would be the biggest one. Just a very simple redrawing, we pick up five seats.”
WHILE IT IS LEGAL FOR TEXAS TO REDRAW –
DEMOCRATS QUICKLY CAME OUT AGAINST IT.
AND NOW PROMINENT DEMOCRATS OUTSIDE OF TEXAS – ARE CALLING IT AN ALL OUT REDISTRICTING WAR.
“this is a war. We are at war.”
TEXAS DEMOCRATS HAVE LEFT THE STATE OF TEXAS TO POSTPONE THE VOTE ON THE NEWLY DRAWN MAP.
AND THAT’S WHERE THINGS CURRENTLY STAND.
A VOTE IN LIMBO.
AND AS EXPLAINED BY CNN’S HARRY ENTEN – IF IT DOES GO THROUGH –
IT COULD HAVE NATIONWIDE IMPLICATIONS.
You might think five seats is just five seats. But keep in mind the margin to spare for the house majority. In 2020, dems had 4 seats. 2022, republicans had 4 seats. Two seats for republicans out of the 2024 elections, five seats can make all the difference in the world.”
WHILE THE WORD GERRYMANDER HAS BEEN THROWN AROUND A LOT HERE –
AND IT DOES HAVE A NEGATIVE CONNOTATION –
GERRYMANDERING DISTRICT MAPS – IS NOT **ILLEGAL BY DEFAULT.
AND STRATEGICALLY DRAWING LINES IS NOTHING NEW.
UNDER THE NEWLY PROPOSED TEXAS MAP —
DEMOCRATS COULD WIND UP HOLDING JUST 21% OF THE STATE’S U.S. HOUSE SEATS.
BUT IN THE LAST ELECTION, DEMOCRATS WON 42% OF THE VOTE.
THAT KIND OF MISMATCH BETWEEN VOTES AND REPRESENTATION
ISN’T UNIQUE TO TEXAS.
IN CALIFORNIA:
REPUBLICANS WON 38% OF THE VOTE —
BUT HOLD ONLY 17% OF THE STATE’S HOUSE SEATS.
AND IN ILLINOIS:
REPUBLICANS GOT 44% OF THE VOTE —
BUT HOLD JUST 18% OF THE HOUSE SEATS.
THE TEXAS REDISTRICTING STORY IS CONSUMING THE NEWS CYCLE.
AND THERE’S STRONG OPINIONS FROM THOSE ON THE POLITICAL LEFT AND RIGHT OVER THE ISSUE.
AND NOW THE MEDIA IS MAKING THOSE POLITICALLY CHARGED ARGUMENTS FOR AND AGAINST –
WITH HEADLINES CONSTRUED IN A WAY THAT REVEAL APARTISAN LEAN.
NEWS OUTLETS USED SEVERAL FORMS OF MEDIA BIAS WITH THE GOAL TO **PERSUADE RATHER THAN **INFORM.
AND THAT’S YOUR BIAS BREAKDOWN.
