The Associated Biases Pressed

USPA NEWS - The discussion of journalistic standards, in the United States, as well as the human rights values that somehow are intertwined with ethics, honesty, and impartiality becomes questionable.

Journalism and human rights often aim to guarantee the dignity and integrity of a person, especially in relation to impartiality and to the state and its power structures. Historically, we can see that the way the media transmit their message can generate panic, insecurity, and ignorance in the population (such as economically based disparity for races).

While cultural diversity has been helping recognize and respect the different manifestations that shape the identity of a person, stereotyping can often lead to prejudices—which are formed opinions about a person that are not based on actual experience or reason which can lead to favoring one person or group over another. Remarks about race, politics, sex, and gender are often based on the most common stereotypes.

Diversity in media companies promotes a healthy work environment, as well as encouraging the exchange of experiences between different professional profiles. Furthermore, diversity guarantees the motivation and increased productivity of employees, factors that can increase the company's competitiveness in the market in which it operates.

Not all the media is the same, and not all journalists are of the same caliber and cannot be lumped together. There are companies that invest more in diversity, so they have different perceptions.

The fact that this behavior is exacerbated by network correspondents, paid pundits, analysts, and or guest experts is troubling as they are seen to be people of authority and therefore holders of a fair and moral compass. When American media "normalizes" bias by telling you what to read and see instead, they are manipulating you. They may want a subject or issue to become popular, or to bring self-awareness to their work, sometimes on futile topics. Overall, these biases set a precedence whether consciously or subconsciously for the viewer/reader to acknowledge, accept, or act upon when consciously or unconsciously.

Such statements from the media, a presumed trusted source for information, can have a profound effect on individuals or a community at large, shaping public opinion whether for the better or for the worse. The concern then is that the media is not just reporting on the news but more alarmingly even if inadvertently it's shaping it.

Such American media bias can be manifested in race reporting with the media. A good example is when the media intentionally or inadvertently, acts white biased, defined as making crime against white people, or the plight of white people more important or consciously elevated to that of victimhood over what might be expected or worse socially acceptable when it comes to people of color. In these cases, the bias comes from what the media perceives as news worthiness, and the value it places on white lives and property when compared to that of people of color.

Certainly, the BLM movement has helped to erase some bias but the recent backlash of transexual rights, and the often lopsided coverage of implemented laws reserving trans rights proves there is still some bias in the media. This was true of coverage of LGBTQ+ conversion therapy and mental health issues in general. Those living on the fringe of society, the disenfranchised the unhoused, all can be victims of bias by the media which places manipulated rating bias above community interests , fair and straight-forward reporting framing. Civil Rights leader Malcolm X described the media as "having immense power, and with this power comes the responsibility to report fair and equitably." It becomes dangerous when the news becomes biased as a business wanting to profit from the "tragedies" of one race or circumstance at the expense of completely ignoring others.