Posted by: thescoundrel | July 27, 2012

Media Bias Still Hard at Work

One of my frequent rants revolves around my belief that there really is no such thing as unbiased reporting. There is just no way to create an interesting story on news or events without allowing personal feelings to creep into the article. The news service Reuters has just allowed personal bias to taint their headline of what should have been a simple story – regarding a national  event. Their title went  “Wife of Trayvon Martin’s killer pleads not guilty to perjury“. There are many ways they could have written that title. But they chose to sensationalize the story with a headline designed to cast a negative/guilty image on the George Zimmerman trial. The Reuters Headline seems to have played judge, jury and hangman on the George Zimmerman trial before it even starts. I have yet to read or hear anything on the Zimmerman trial that sways my opinion towards guilty or not guilty verdict. Yet Media bias is alive and well and hard at work in the Zimmerman trial. And they managed to use a story about the legal  troubles of Zimmerman’s wife, not the Zimmerman murder trial itself,  to attempt to kneecap the George Zimmerman defense. Tainted Jury Pool anyone?



  1. Advertising works! Unpaid advertising works better! But ‘word of mouth’ works best of all, and when my trusted friends Fat Eddie, Strap-on Maddow and Xerox Al tell me what’s what, I’m gonna buy me some ‘what’.

    Although exposing media bias using Zimmerman’s predicament is like popping a pimple off of Rodan’s butt.

    Most likely SCOTUS’ decision on Citizen’s United was to counteract the free ‘word of mouth’ anti-Conservative advertising spewed by ABC, CBS, MSNBC, NBC, NYT, WaPo, LATimes and whatever’s left of CNN. If I remember correctly, that was just before Justice Roberts turned rat.

  2. How can you call the media bias? After all, they stopped calling Zimmerman a ‘white/latino’.

  3. Actually Ghost you hit the nail solidly on the head, I think. The reporters and editors involved with this article are not interested in reporting an actual story. They wanted to sensationalize the story in order to draw a crowd. Their title can work just like the subliminal advertising messages so many were decrying a few years back. But I bet you don’t see many in the media industry cry foul against the Reuters piece and try and expose the Reuters bias. I know a family that was pissed on by the QC Times in a lesser event a few years back, over the Times trying to push a social agenda over seatbelts, following a family tragedy. One of them wrote in and was basically blew off by the Times editor Touney. She just didn’t give a shit that the article they wrote only added to the tragedy. And the stupid part was the seatbelt issue had absolutely nothing to do with the tragedy.

    Intentional or unintentional Cruiser, the stupidest part of it all is whether an individual is leaning towards innocent or guilty this headline is little more than an attempt to taint the jury opinion.

  4. This is an interesting story tying into your post. What if Conservatives began ‘shutting down’ bias media outlets? Sad to think the Mexicans are more advanced than we are.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: