Media bias is found in every story and article published, each author twists and bends information to fit their views. With everyone trying to get their side across, we never actually get the entire story from just one source. For, example earlier this year in February, three muslim students were murdered by their neighbor, Craig Stephen Hicks. This story was covered by many news outlets, including CNN and Fox News, who have both been known to be very biased. Two different sides of the story were created, some believed that the shooting was caused by a parking dispute between the neighbors. Others said if was because of the student’s religion, and are calling it a hate crime. With each side showing so much bias, it is difficult to understand
…show more content…
It automatically makes the reader assume that the shooting was caused by the student’s religion, before even reading the article. Zeba Khan the writer of this article starts it off by saying that there have been a discussion on whether the Chapel Hill shooting was caused by a parking dispute or by religion (Khan, P.1). He uses bias in his tone and in his word choices he goes straight out and says: “Let's be real. People don't die over parking spots.” (Khan, P.1) He is basically telling people to wake up and see that this was the cause of lack of acceptance of diversity, it is a very loaded statement. Again, Khan uses bias by spin, when he says that Hicks’ Facebook page suggests that he is a new atheist, and probably had a particular hatred towards Islam (P.5). There was no actual proof saying that Hicks had anything particular against muslims. Finally, Khan showed bias by omission when he failed to mention that Hicks was obsessed with all of his neighbor’s parties, and parking patterns (Katz, P. 11). The bias used in this article only tells one side of the …show more content…
His article starts off by naming the dead students, and followed by saying that investigators have found out that the reason for the shooting was over parking spaces (O’Reilly, P. 2). He, then goes on and includes quotes from people who believe that the shooting was caused over religion, and blame an anti-muslim bias in the U.S. to which he responds with: “It is simply revolting that any person would throw around accusations against people who had nothing to do with the murder.” (O’Reilly, P.4-P.9) Here he is again using bias by spin/tone, using words like revolting and accusations, makes the other seem like awful people accusing others of causing murder. He said that they were trying to “advance a political agenda or seek vengeance against those with whom they disagree.” (O’Reilly, P.7 & P.8) O’Reilly describes Hicks as a “disturbed individual,” also saying that the incident was not caused by religion (P.7). O’Reilly also uses bias by omission, because he fails to mention that before the shooting, one of the victims told her family that Hicks had an issue with how they dressed (Ahmed & Shoichet, P.12). When the male victim lived by himself, there were no problems but as soon as his wife came to live with him wearing a hijab the problems started (Ahmed & Shoichet, P.13). The father of the victim even quotes her saying “I think he hates us for who we are and how we
It automatically makes the reader assume that the shooting was caused by the student’s religion, before even reading the article. Zeba Khan the writer of this article starts it off by saying that there have been a discussion on whether the Chapel Hill shooting was caused by a parking dispute or by religion (Khan, P.1). He uses bias in his tone and in his word choices he goes straight out and says: “Let's be real. People don't die over parking spots.” (Khan, P.1) He is basically telling people to wake up and see that this was the cause of lack of acceptance of diversity, it is a very loaded statement. Again, Khan uses bias by spin, when he says that Hicks’ Facebook page suggests that he is a new atheist, and probably had a particular hatred towards Islam (P.5). There was no actual proof saying that Hicks had anything particular against muslims. Finally, Khan showed bias by omission when he failed to mention that Hicks was obsessed with all of his neighbor’s parties, and parking patterns (Katz, P. 11). The bias used in this article only tells one side of the …show more content…
His article starts off by naming the dead students, and followed by saying that investigators have found out that the reason for the shooting was over parking spaces (O’Reilly, P. 2). He, then goes on and includes quotes from people who believe that the shooting was caused over religion, and blame an anti-muslim bias in the U.S. to which he responds with: “It is simply revolting that any person would throw around accusations against people who had nothing to do with the murder.” (O’Reilly, P.4-P.9) Here he is again using bias by spin/tone, using words like revolting and accusations, makes the other seem like awful people accusing others of causing murder. He said that they were trying to “advance a political agenda or seek vengeance against those with whom they disagree.” (O’Reilly, P.7 & P.8) O’Reilly describes Hicks as a “disturbed individual,” also saying that the incident was not caused by religion (P.7). O’Reilly also uses bias by omission, because he fails to mention that before the shooting, one of the victims told her family that Hicks had an issue with how they dressed (Ahmed & Shoichet, P.12). When the male victim lived by himself, there were no problems but as soon as his wife came to live with him wearing a hijab the problems started (Ahmed & Shoichet, P.13). The father of the victim even quotes her saying “I think he hates us for who we are and how we