Talk:Media bias/Archive 3

Reduce US centric wording
I don't have enough edits to edit this page so I will suggest them here instead. The phrasing:

"Content bias, differential treatment of the two parties in political conflicts, and to write biased news that benefits one side."

Assumes a two party system, circularly uses the word "biased" in a definition of a type of bias and doesn't accurately reflect the source's definition of content bias: "consistent patterns in the framing of mediated communication that promote the influence of one side in conflicts over the use of government power".

It could also do this list good to separate it into explicitly political biases and other more general biases. Hugstar (talk) 02:02, 11 May 2023 (UTC)


 * I made the change you suggested.Rick Norwood (talk) 09:50, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Media bias in the Ukraine
'UN Human Rights Ukraine released reports on treatment of prisoners of war and overall human rights situation in Ukraine' Press release, 24 March 2023

Is it possible to have a section highlighting the general lack of balance from our press and TV news in presenting positive views of Ukrainian actions, while reporting negatively about the Russians?

For despite most media outlets being willing to highlight some of the Ukrainian government's more wild and outlandish claims of human rights abuses by the Russians, reports of war crimes by the Ukrainians are often downplayed - or just not reported.

Is not this evidence of Media Bias?


 * This talk page is for improvements to this article. Have you got some citation to a reliable source talking about media bias in relation to Russia or Ukraine or 'our', whoever that is, media in its treatment of them? That's the sort of thing you need for something like that. NadVolum (talk) 22:18, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

But are not the "UN Human Rights Ukraine released reports on treatment of prisoners of war and overall human rights situation in Ukraine" considered a reliable source of public information? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.149.166.165 (talk) 21:44, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
 * And where does that report (which you haven't bothered to link) talk about the supposed bias in reporting on Russia vs Ukraine? --2001:8003:1C20:8C00:1C52:5565:BE68:538D (talk) 05:06, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Then again, cannot people be bothed to type and search for the name of the report? For does not the UN Report counter the bias by mentioning the Ukrainian war crimes our media outlets tends to leave out? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.110.75.109 (talk) 13:10, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I think you're still not getting it. Wikipedia doesn't analyse the facts and report on them. See WP:5P2 'Editors' personal experiences, interpretations, or opinions do not belong on Wikipedia.' We need some reliable source to say something first. To go into this article you'd need a source that points out the media bias. Otherwise it will be removed as WP:OR or with the dreaded Wikipedia citation needed. NadVolum (talk) 20:24, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Media bias as Government Policy
The Turkish president development plan gives awards to media news agencies if they report only positive stories about women. Negative stories about women are not reported because of this.

604. The representation of women in the media will be improved and media literacy of women will be increased. 604.1. The participation of women in digi- tal literacy trainings will be increased. 604.2. Best practices like news, advertise- ments, series, movies, cartoons, children's programs which contribute to the improve- ment of women's representation in the media will be rewarded.

Source https://www.sbb.gov.tr/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Eleventh_Development_Plan_2019-2023.pdf 2600:1700:D591:5F10:8F7:E8F9:14B1:6F19 (talk) 15:59, 17 October 2023 (UTC)


 * First two sound good to me. The third is rather troubling. I know Turkey is very different from Afghanistan but I know exactly what it would mean if they said only positive stories about women should be reported in Afghanistan. NadVolum (talk) 17:17, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
 * The third item where media is rewarded for not reporting negative news, such as woman arrested on murder charge, is government induced media bias. It can be included in the media bias wiki topic 2600:1700:D591:5F10:708C:4275:B8BA:976D (talk) 19:40, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Have you got WP:Reliable sources saying it is media bias? I'm afraid one's own opinions do not count in Wikipedia, see WP:OR. It needs a newspaper or an expert in such matters to note it. NadVolum (talk) 21:43, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

Media bias saying 'Hamas-run health authority'
Te news outlets seem to have agreed to not say 'terrorist' about Hamas but have engaged in something far worse I think by using the phrase above. Here are criticisms of the use of the phrase which with minor variations has been used by most of the western media instead of Gaza Health Ministry.


 * 'Another example is qualifying Gaza's Health Ministry as "Hamas-run" when citing the Palestinian death toll, Odeh said. ... ... Although small and technically accurate, adding "Hamas-run" risks casting doubt over data that has historically been credible, Oden said. "It helps kill empathy," she said.


 * "As Israel flattens Gaza, the Western media ties itself in semantic knots — insisting, for instance, on using phrases such as “Hamas-run health ministry” to shroud casualty figures in doubt or worse, to do Israel’s job for it by associating all residents of Gaza with terrorism."

NadVolum (talk) 00:20, 30 November 2023 (UTC)


 * I agree but I'm not sure how this relates to the article. Are you proposing something be added or taken away? 2603:7081:1603:A300:2462:26D6:EA74:20B6 (talk) 16:22, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I was thinking of putting in something along those lines, those references directly talk about active media bias in that war. Probably need some other references relating to media bias in the war to justify a section but I'm sure there's enough out there. There doesn't seem to me to be such strong active media bias in the Russian Ukraine war, they can get away with just reporting things as they are. NadVolum (talk) 18:53, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

New source for criticism of Al Jazeera from the Arab side required
The original source was depreciated; is there a RS that could take it‘s place? FortunateSons (talk) 22:05, 9 January 2024 (UTC)