By Gary Pullman
Fact-checked by Darci Heikkinen
Media bias is a pervasive issue in news reporting, often shaping how stories are presented and interpreted by readers. While the definition of bias can be contentious, tools like AllSides provide a framework for understanding it by categorizing news outlets as “left” (liberal), leaning left, right (conservative), leaning right, or center (neutral). Here are ten ways in which news media subtly—and not so subtly—manipulate audiences.
10. Analogies That Create a Battle
News outlets frequently use war metaphors to dramatize political situations, framing them as battles or conflicts. For example, a headline from The Daily Beast described Trump’s legal challenges as “fights on multiple fronts.” This language suggests a combative environment, priming readers to view legal disputes as desperate struggles rather than standard litigation. Similarly, right-leaning media have portrayed President Biden as “under fire” or “taking hits,” reducing complex policy discussions to a narrative of conflict and aggression.
Such analogies simplify the intricacies of political discourse, encouraging audiences to interpret disagreements as zero-sum games. This framing can lead to a more polarized and combative public discourse, where policy debates are perceived as life-and-death struggles rather than opportunities for negotiation and compromise.
9. Loaded Verbs in Headlines
The choice of verbs in headlines can dramatically influence readers' perceptions of the story. For instance, a headline from Fox News stated that “Pete Buttigieg slams Democrats’ ‘Portlandia’ approach to pushing diversity.” The verb “slams” conveys a sense of aggression and hostility, implying that Buttigieg is engaged in a fierce attack rather than a reasoned critique. In contrast, alternative phrasing like “criticizes” would present a more measured tone.
This technique is prevalent across the political spectrum; left-leaning outlets might describe a Republican response as “blasting” or “torching” policies, invoking strong emotional reactions. Linguists note that emotionally charged verbs can lead readers to interpret statements with heightened intensity, framing ordinary critiques as fiery confrontations, which skews public perception of the actual discourse.
8. Connotative Modifiers
Adjectives and modifiers carry emotional weight that can shape reader perceptions even before they engage with the content. For example, a headline labeling an individual as a “disgraced” or “embattled” politician implies wrongdoing or vulnerability. A Mother Jones headline referred to a local figure as “Oakland’s Merchant of Bad Vibes,” nudging readers toward a negative view before they read the article.
This technique is pervasive; terms like “controversial” or “troubled” can color opinions about individuals or organizations, influencing how audiences interpret their actions. By embedding these modifiers, editors can shape perceptions significantly, often leading readers to retain these impressions long after the specifics of the story are forgotten.
7. Article Placement Above the Fold
The placement of articles can signal their importance to readers, a principle that has long been understood in journalism. A Columbia Journalism Review analysis of The New York Times during the 2016 election found that front-page stories focused heavily on scandals and polls while neglecting policy discussions. This prioritization suggests that sensational issues are more significant, guiding reader attention toward spectacle rather than substance.
In the digital age, the concept of “above the fold” has transformed; stories highlighted on homepages, featured in mobile alerts, or trending in Google News serve similar purposes. Algorithms now dictate which stories receive prominence, often elevating scandalous headlines over in-depth policy analyses. This practice can mislead readers about what truly matters in the news landscape, shaping public discourse in favor of sensationalism.
6. Biased Photographs
Images can powerfully influence how stories are perceived, often more so than the accompanying text. For instance, the New York Post once ran a whimsical story featuring Elon Musk’s child, accompanied by a cheeky caption that portrayed both Musk and Trump in a comical light. Such imagery can create an impression of absurdity or incompetence, even if the underlying story is innocuous.
Historical examples highlight this issue; for example, Time magazine’s decision to darken O.J. Simpson’s mugshot was widely criticized for perpetuating racist stereotypes. Political figures are often subjected to biased imagery as well: John Kerry’s windsurfing photo was used to paint him as elitist, while coverage of protests can either showcase peaceful demonstrators or violent clashes based on the outlet's narrative goals. The choice of image, including cropping and timing, plays a significant role in shaping audience interpretation.
5. One-Sided Reporting
Many outlets cater exclusively to their ideological bases, leading to what Pew Research has identified as a significant issue of “one-sided reporting.” This slant can alienate readers who seek balanced perspectives, reinforcing existing biases and contributing to societal polarization. While partisan outlets may resonate with their core audiences, they risk eroding trust among broader readerships.
The phenomenon of the echo chamber emerges when one-sided coverage prevails, causing readers to hear only perspectives that align with their beliefs. Gallup and Pew studies indicate that conservatives increasingly distrust mainstream media, while liberals gravitate toward a narrow set of trusted news sources. This divide has developed over decades of reporting that rewarded loyalty to specific narratives while neglecting to engage with a more moderate or diverse audience.
4. Exaggeration to Fill Space
Exaggeration is a longstanding tactic in journalism, with roots dating back to the days of “yellow journalism.” Mark Twain himself admitted to inflating stories to create engaging narratives. Today, this has evolved into the prevalent use of clickbait, characterized by sensational headlines that promise more drama than the actual content delivers. Phrases like “You Won’t Believe What Happened Next” entice readers, even if the story itself is relatively mundane.
This tendency to exaggerate not only distorts the reality of events but also prioritizes sensationalism over factual reporting. Just as Twain’s embellished stories sold papers, today’s clickbait drives traffic and engagement, even at the cost of journalistic integrity. Readers may find themselves misled about the significance of events due to this hyperbolic approach.
3. Sensational Headlines
Sensationalism thrives in the modern media landscape, where emotionally charged headlines dominate. A 2022 study found that many newspapers fill their front pages with bizarre or shocking stories designed to elicit strong reactions. This practice, which has long been a hallmark of tabloids, can detract from serious journalism by prioritizing attention-grabbing content over nuanced reporting.
The New York Post is notorious for sensationalist headlines, such as “Headless Body in Topless Bar.” Such attention-grabbing tactics can overshadow substantive issues, encouraging readers to engage with stories that are more about shock value than critical analysis. Neuroscience research indicates that emotionally charged language increases the likelihood of social media sharing, reinforcing a cycle in which sensationalism often trumps thoughtful discourse.
2. Political Endorsements
Historically, newspapers have served as partisan advocates, with political endorsements exerting significant influence over voter decisions. Figures like William Randolph Hearst wielded endorsements as powerful tools for shaping public opinion. However, many modern publications have moved away from this practice, fearing backlash from readers.
When The Arizona Republic endorsed Hillary Clinton in 2016, it sparked outrage among some subscribers, highlighting the potential risks of alienating audiences. Research suggests that endorsements have diminished in sway, yet they still signal a publication's ideological stance and can incite controversy. The abandonment of endorsements by many outlets reflects the changing landscape of media influence and the challenges of maintaining credibility across diverse audiences.
1. Obituaries That Soft-Pedal Scandal
Even obituaries can reveal bias, as seen in the case of O.J. Simpson. When he passed away, The New York Times initially framed his life story in a way that softened the impact of his murder charges. This wording drew criticism from readers who felt it downplayed the gravity of the situation. The paper later revised the obituary to emphasize the trial's implications for discussions on race and justice in America.
Similarly, the coverage of Margaret Thatcher’s death varied widely, with some outlets glorifying her leadership while others focused on her divisive policies and public protests. These editorial choices reveal how media narratives continue to shape public perception of individuals, even posthumously. The way obituaries are crafted influences how future generations remember historical figures, underscoring the power of media in shaping collective memory.
These methods illustrate the various ways news media manipulate readers through language, imagery, and editorial choices, ultimately influencing public perception and understanding of critical issues. Understanding these tactics is essential for readers seeking to navigate the complex landscape of modern journalism.