Bias and Censorship within the Media
Considering that we live in the 21st century, an age of technology and freedom, you’d expect that people would have progressive feelings when it comes to free speech. Now imagine, there you are working your 9–5, and something catches your attention. Ah yes, naturally, you give your input on it. But in return, you’re told to shut up. Your opinion, it’s worthless. You know why? Because it’s not your job to talk about things outside of your job. Instead, you’re told to get back to work, since that’s all you’re good for. For some reason, society possesses this preconceived notion that your livelihood and your income define who you are as a citizen; that it dictates your worth.
A Voice for the Voiceless
Take a moment to step into the shoes of LeBron James. LeBron, known as “King James” to many, was recently told to “shut up and dribble.” Being told to “shut up and dribble” was anything short of blatant disrespect to James’ character both as an African-American man and a professional athlete. James, perhaps the greatest basketball player of all time, is well, quite skilled at dribbling. But he is much more than a dribbler. He is a father, a husband, a significant influence on people’s lives all around the world, and a role model to children who are growing up without a father figure in their lives, just as he once did. He has donated millions of dollars to charity, created multiple foundations, and even opened a school for underprivileged children in his hometown of Akron, Ohio. Though accomplished both on and off the court, all that James had worked towards in his life was nullified once his voice was silenced.
During a video segment on Uninterrupted, a platform co-founded by James, he was joined by fellow NBA All-Star, Kevin Durant. Both superstars were sharply critical of President Donald Trump and the nation’s racial climate.
“We will definitely not shut up and dribble,” James said. “I will definitely not do that. I mean too much to society. I mean too much to the youth. I mean too much to so many kids that feel like they don’t have a way out, and they need someone to help lead them out of the situation they’re in.”
This statement was in response to a lashing of insults from Fox News’ Laura Ingraham, who had previously responded to James’ previous public opinion of President Trump. He proudly announced that he feels President Trump “doesn’t understand the people. And really don’t give a f — about the people.” He spared no feelings, as he should. He felt a certain way, and he spoke on it, just as anyone else would. It was to no surprise that Ingraham disagreed with James’ opinion considering she works for the conservative news company, Fox News. Not only did she disagree with him, but she turned things personal.
Rather than professionally disagreeing, Ingraham went on air and said that his comments were “barely intelligible” and “ungrammatical,” and that you should not take political advice from “someone who gets paid $100 million a year to bounce a ball (he doesn’t) … “Keep the political comments to yourselves … Shut up and dribble.
During the time this was happening, James was also working on a documentary series focusing on an alternate view of the NBA and its history. However, he didn’t have a name for it until he heard Ingraham’s comment, “Shut Up and Dribble.” He then, in turn, used that quote and used it as the name of his series.
He took this direct insult and was able to make it not just into a recognizable brand, but a movement much larger than himself.
He and other professional athletes around the world took social media by storm with the hashtags “#WeWillNotShutUpAndDribble” and “#MoreThanAnAthlete” to signify their unity. This much-needed movement solidified that all people, not just athletes, are human too.
Considering Ingraham’s jab towards James was based on the fact that he is an athlete speaking on political situations is actually quite hypocritical considering that before his comments, Fox News had hosted an array of current and former professional athletes on the show to discuss politics and other matters. The only key difference, of course, is that these guests were invited as guests because of their similar political views. This display of Bias and Censorship is nothing new for Fox News. In fact, it’s quite common amongst nearly all news platforms.
Bias and Censorship apply to many things in life, but in regards to media, the effects they hold can be damaging to people’s reputations and livelihoods. Bias, in media, is defined as the perceived prejudice of journalists and news producers, being for or against something within the mass media, in the selection of the many events and stories that are reported and how they are covered. Similarly, Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication, or other information, on the basis that such material is considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or “inconvenient.” Many times, these two are often confused with “fake news,” given the fact they hold similar implications.
Political Censorship
Remembering situations such as James’ help us as media and news consumers to realize how important it is to understand both sides of the story without inflicting our own possible bias on the situation. By this, I mean that we shouldn’t be so quick to shut ourselves off from taking in and listening to any statement, news, opinion, or theory that goes against our beliefs, for whatever the reason may be. The example given about LeBron James shows how quickly our personal ideas and selfish thoughts can result in Bias and Censorship. It was interesting to see that instead of stooping to Ingraham’s level, James was able to find good in what had happened.
While LeBron refused for his voice to be censored, he recently contradicted his beliefs by suggesting that someone else’s should be. It sounds quite hypocritical, to say the least.
This whole debacle started when Houston Rocket’s General Manager, Daryl Morey, tweeted an image in support of the ongoing human rights protests in Hong Kong.
The protests are in light of a new extradition bill that would have allowed for criminal suspects to be extradited to mainland China, under certain circumstances. Opponents said this risked exposing Hong Kongers to unfair trials and rough treatment. They also argued the bill would give China more considerable influence over Hong Kong and could be used to target activists and journalists. These protests are a huge deal politically considering China’s history of human rights issues and the United States governments’ involvement.
Being that Hong Kong is a part of China, and China has strong ties to the NBA (National Basketball Association), it is a touchy subject to voice publicly on, no matter what position you are in. In Daryl Morey’s situation, he took a seemingly safe route by merely tweeting an image, showing that he stood with the efforts of the protestors fighting back against Censorship. Personally, I felt that this was a good move made by Morey considering how strongly we value free speech as a country. However, when asked about the situation, James spoke negatively of Morey’s support of the protestors. It wasn’t because James was generally interested in the case, rather he is the face of the NBA. A corporation that has league offices in Hong Kong, Beijing, Shanghai, and Taipei. A corporation that also happens to have an estimated 500 million fans and multi-billion dollar deals in China.
James said it was his belief that Morey was “either misinformed or not really educated on the situation” with the NBA and China, and even insisted that the Rockets general manager hadn’t properly considered the repercussions of his words. “So many people could have been harmed, not only financially but physically, emotionally, spiritually.”
Others had contrasting opinions of James’. Iain Levine, a professor at Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs, thought otherwise and went on record to say:
“LeBron’s criticism of Morey is problematic for two reasons… First, LeBron is the one who seems ill-informed about the situation in Hong Kong and the human rights issues at stake. But, more importantly, he seems to endorse the idea that China is allowed to impose its repression of free speech on American citizens in the US. LeBron claims that he and the NBA had a difficult week but not half as difficult as the protestors in Hong Kong.”
It doesn’t take much in-depth thinking to understand that James’ comments regarding Morey aren’t entirely motivated by his stance on the political state of the communist country. Instead, James was well aware of the severe financial implications at risk. In a situation like this, there are few who have a more prominent voice. Adam Silver, the league’s commissioner, can’t just up and denounce the actions of one of his team owners, and fellow owners wouldn’t dare go out of their way to make one of their own look foolish. So James seemingly bit the bullet for the NBA by speaking out against this. Although I understand James’ actions for this sticky situation, I cannot accept them considering his past.
Being someone who was the subject of Censorship, you’d think James would have more of a neutral response understanding the weight words can carry. His denouncing of Morey was similar to what Ingraham did to him. Both James and Ingraham used Censorship towards someone for personal motivations without seeing the big picture. While James’ comments towards Morey weren’t politically motivated like Ingrahams, they still followed the same suit. He thought only of the financial implications associated with the situation and not the humane side of things.
There were thousands of people protesting for the sake of their voice being heard because their government simply doesn’t value their opinions. James could’ve recognized this and have been a voice for these people, just as he has for the minorities in America. If he were to further use this “a voice for the voiceless” image he embraced, it would have put his activism on a global scale for the world to witness. This could’ve, in turn, even strengthened his fan base, thus increasing his financial gain.
Bias in Multi-Media
Looking at each of these examples as a whole gives us an understanding of some of the underlying issues of Censorship and Bias in our country across the board. As we know, a lot of the times, we often perceive situations to derive from political bias, but it’s essential to be aware of the other types of bias and censorship present amongst us. Once that is done, we can start to understand how these situations begin to unfold. Luckily for people such as myself, we live in a country where we have the ability to not only recognize when Censorship or Bias is affecting our lives, but also be able to do something about it.
When looking at the way freedom of speech is treated in other countries, it is clear that this is not an option for many. Considering we live our whole lives as “free,” it’s hard for us to really understand and differentiate the political Censorship (as well as other Biases and Censorships), that we experience from that of our country. In the case of the NBA and Hong Kong situation, the people of Hong Kong are suffering through a time of political Censorship and suppression of voices, whereas LeBron James censored the voice of Daryl Morey due to the financial impact it could have on him. Both pressing issues, but clearly, James’ starts to fall under a sort of “first world problem” category when comparing it to the people of Hong Kong.
Sometimes our problems seem out of context when comparing them to other things in life, but that doesn’t mean we should lose focus. While it’s easy to compare different countries’ restrictiveness to ours in terms of freedom, it’s essential to take a step back and reconsider what the word “free” really means. Freedom of the press and free speech are two rights that Americans seem to value as a whole because they were the fundamentals our country was built on.
While the media as a whole has a job to report the news and other events to the public, companies often put their own twist on things. Many times there are specific influences on the stories put out to draw in a particular audience or portray a certain message. This doing falls under the category when it is motivated by the wrong reasons; financially, politically, religiously, racially, etc. These are all factors that can lead to bias, without us as consumers even realizing it since they play subliminal roles in different areas, sometimes even crossing over each other. By definition, there are over a dozen types of bias, but I found that some are more relevant than others in regards to multi-media. To mention a few; advertising bias, gatekeeping bias, and sensationalism bias are three biases that I feel are most present amongst our media today. Each is different in their own way, but target the view in different ways, affecting how they receive information.
Advertising is bias one of two things; first is the idea that if a product is repeatedly placed in front of an audience, they will feel compelled to purchase it. Also known as “product placement”, often times not as subtle as intended.
Secondly, when a company or someone who spends a lot of money on advertisements, they will then, in return expect to be able to have an influence on what they are advertising.
Gatekeeping bias is when stories are selected or deselected depending on political favoritism or personal preference of something.
The idea that certain things should or shouldn’t be aired on a news station in order to keep it flush with the rest of its stories or to follow a particular agenda is an example of gatekeeping.
Lastly, and somewhat differently, sensationalism bias is giving the impression of or instilling the thought that something out of the ordinary is likely to happen to you due to an isolated incident.
For example, nearly every time there’s a commercial airplane crash or malfunction somewhere in the world, you are most likely to see it on the news that night. Why? Because it draws in viewers. But showing a plane on the news every time it crashes is what starts to instill fear in people because they only see the irrational side of things when it happens, never the thousands of safe flights that take place every day.
Identifying and understanding these types of biases is crucial if you are someone who wants to make sure they are receiving all sides of the story. But it’s essential to be aware of your own personal thoughts and opinions interacting with the information you are receiving. Just as many things in life, your mindset dictates the way you think. If you are already decided on something before taking in the information, you won’t get anywhere. Being open to both sides of the story will help you see the whole picture and not just one side of things. For example, you could read an article on a political figure. If you are a fan of them, you may read it and think, “Ugh fake news back at it again ripping Donny a new one,” or if you oppose them, you may sit there and think “Wow, Trump must’ve paid off the mortgage for the house of whoever wrote this steamy pile of lies.” So while bias in multi-media is an issue, we still need to be mindful of how we perceive things, recognizing bias, and not inflicting our own personal bias on what we see.
The Effect of Censorship on Society
Living in a world where we are so quick to accept any information, fake news is everywhere we go (real “fake news,” not fake “fake news”). With fake news infiltrating our lives through different types of media, the debate of censoring fake news presents itself. If we have the right to free press, shouldn’t we be allowed to post what we want? Should it be censored, or is it up to us to decide the real from the fake?
Too many times have I gone on Twitter and seen a viral tweet where something is said untruly, or out of context, and the account owner doesn’t take ownership of their mistakes. Or instead, some reasoning or a half-assed apology is given in the replies.
But by then, it’s possible that hundreds of thousands of people have now been affected by this misinformation. While this is just one situation I’ve experienced, it’s important to note how easily it can happen. What makes Twitter unique is that there are fewer restrictions on what content can be posted compared to other popular social media sites. This allows misinformation to spread by wildfire since any public tweet can be “retweeted” by somebody to their followers, so they now see the same thing. At times I like to believe that people tweet falsities by mistake, but other times it’s clear there are other reasons.
Many times accounts will tweet things falsely or out of context to spark a reaction from an audience, causing the tweet to go viral. The goal in this instance is not to spread knowledge amongst peers; rather, getting as many likes and retweets as possible. Over time this will result in followers, raising the worth of the account. Once gaining a couple of thousand followers, it’s common for the people who run accounts like these to sell them to other people who want to own an account with a lot of followers (See also: Clout Chaser). Things get even more dangerous here, considering we live in a world where people tend to associate likes, shares, and followers with truthfulness.
While Twitter seems to be pretty lax in situations like this, other social media companies like Facebook have taken steps in combating misinformation. Since the 2016 Presidential Election, they publicly increased their efforts in limiting any sign of “fake news.” While this has worked to some extent, there has been some backlash as a result of this. Recently, conservatives have taken to social media to voice concerns of Facebook censoring their posts due to political affiliation. While they claim they were censored for political beliefs, it seems that the issue isn’t quite that. Instead, the algorithm or system Facebook has used to take precautions to limit the spread of misinformation on its site is simply flawed. Many people of all backgrounds have come forward saying Facebook removed a post because of this or that, but it’s just a part of protecting the user.
People are upset because their posts are being removed for no reason, which I understand, but there are some things they do not understand. The first is that social media is not theirs, and it is not a right. They have signed away their rights by agreeing to user agreements prior to signing up for the website.
Facebook isn’t a branch of the government, so they do not have to guarantee you free speech. They can delete any information that may be harmful both for the user’s sake and their sake. Secondly, people need to understand the need for precautions like this. Obviously, as a society, we are unable to police ourselves, so we need someone to do it for us. And these companies cannot rely on its users to police themselves because their asses will be in the jackpot when shit hits the fan, so they need to maintain control. It truly is for the greater good, and once people realize that, they will start to appreciate it.
Ultimately, Censorship on social media isn’t always caused by political or personal motivations; instead, it’s done for precautionary measures. This sort of Censorship does end up affecting users, especially when it is harmless material. However, instances of Censorship due to personal views such as that seen recently with Netflix is unacceptable. Just recently, they have censored scenes of smoking, suicide, and even a political video (at the request of the Saudi Arabian government). By censoring them, they are taking away someone’s hard work and creativity while also robbing the viewer from understanding and appreciating the vision of that person. Situations like this really cause you to take a step back and think about the implications that Censorship can have on us.
Final Thoughts
Each example, situation, and issue I have presented before you has one common element, human influence. At the end of the day, we are the ones responsible for the problems we face within the media. Maybe not directly, but one way or another, whether we realize it or not, we have all contributed to the Bias and Censorship in the Media. We are the users, the consumers, and it is truly up to us as a whole when we decide that enough is enough, and when it comes to an end. Of course, it can’t happen overnight, but it can happen within you. All it takes is for you to be mindful and really think about what you listen to and what you say. The flow of what information we allow to travel to our brains and out of our mouths is something that only we can control.
