DETECTING BIAS IN THE MEDIA:



Detecting Bias in the Media:

How Are You Being Manipulated?

This assignment asks you to pick an issue currently being discussed in the media and follow it for a number of weeks. As you look at how the event or topic is covered by multiple news sources, you should analyze and compare the language used in the reporting. Major events and topics are covered by numerous sources, most of which will offer fairly similar information. However, the way they phrase that information, the “spin” they put on it, can differ quite drastically.

Today, more and more people get their news from only one source, usually one in which the bias is similar to their own. This increases the temptation to see the news from one’s usual source as unvarnished truth. One tends to stop asking skeptical questions or thinking critically, and that kind of complacency makes an audience easy to manipulate. Your task, in writing this paper, is to shake off that complacency, to go in as an active and skeptical reader in order to identify and analyze the manipulative language used in each news source.

Research Requirements:

at least 4 major news outlets/sources (These should be new sources that represent a variety of perspectives. For example, you would get an interesting mix if you chose the BBC, Al Jazeera, FOX, and the Huffington Post. If you have a source you would like to use, and you are not sure if it qualifies, ask. Exceptions may be made on a case by case basis.)

at least 2-3 articles from each source (Look for articles with actual depth. Short blurbs are not very useful for our purposes.)

a minimum of 10 articles cited

Warnings:

➢ Try to set aside your own preconceptions, because those may steer you astray. Look at what is actually being said, not what you expect to be said. You may be surprised by the difference between the perceived bias vs. the actual bias of some of these sources.

➢ There are more positions, and more kinds of bias, than just right and left, conservative and liberal. Be careful to keep this in mind as you research and analyze. Don’t oversimplify.

➢ You are NOT choosing a side and arguing for that side in your paper. You are analyzing the language used by the news sources, and making an argument about the differing degrees and patterns of bias in those sources.

Due: Monday March 30

Length: 4-7 pages

Format: MLA format. Double-spaced, Times New Roman 12 point font, pages numbered and stapled. Your paper must have a works cited and a title!

Additional Requirements: You will turn in an electronic copy to AND a hardcopy to me in class, in a folder along with the following support materials:

Copies of your articles, with the quotations you used in the paper highlighted.

Rough Draft(s) (Due 3/24-3/27)

Skeleton Draft (Due Monday 3/23)

Thesis (Due Friday 3/20)

Article Analysis (Due Friday 3/6)

Topic proposal (Due block day 2/25-26)

NOTE: The paper will be counted as late if it is not submitted by class time on the due date, even if you are absent. Please plan accordingly.

Name:_____________________________ Period: ________

Media Bias Paper Grading Rubric

| |A |B |C |D |F |

|Thesis |Strong arguable thesis in |Clear arguable thesis in intro. |Identifiable thesis: might be |Hard to find or out of place |Missing |

| |intro |Less eloquent than an A thesis |rather vague, or not truly |thesis. Might not actually be |States author’s position |

| |Compares the sources’ |Contains judgment about bias and |debatable |debatable |on the issue/does not |

| |patterns of biased |comparisons of source patterns. |Contains judgment & source |Missing judgment of bias OR |offer either judgment |

| |language use in a |May be less sophisticated and more|pattern comparisons, but is |comparison of sources and their|about bias or comparison |

| |sophisticated manner |obvious |awkward and basic or |patterns |of sources |

| | | |oversimplified | | |

|Evidence |Specific |Solid, but somewhat weaker than an|Adequate, but rather weak: more|Weak or flawed: tends towards |Generalizations or summary|

| |Relevant |A paper: more examples needed, |examples needed, more specific |summary instead of true |instead of analysis and |

| |Supports argument |more specific evidence needed, |evidence needed, more relevant |evidence & analysis; not |textual evidence |

| |convincingly |more relevant evidence needed, |evidence needed |enough evidence; evidence does|Author bias clear |

| |Well integrated |better integration needed |Evidence usually analyzed and |not prove claim |Paper argues for its own |

| |Clear, insightful analysis|Evidence analyzed and explained, |explained, but perhaps not |Little analysis and/or |view instead of analyzing |

| |that does not hint at |but perhaps not quite as well as |always well. Hints of author |explanation. Author bias |the sources’ views |

| |author bias |an A paper. Remains objective, |bias may be evident |evident |Not enough sources, |

| |Source choices and |but is less insightful or eloquent|Source choices could be better.|Evidence misinterpreted or |inappropriate sources |

| |quotation choices are |Source/quotation choices are |Better evidence exists. |taken out of context | |

| |particularly apt |appropriate | |Sources chosen without much | |

| | | | |evident thought | |

|Organization |Logical paragraph ordering|Formulaic and stiff or stilted |Minor problems in progression |Illogical or arbitrary |Illogical progression of |

| |Order matches up with |organization of argument |of argument |progression of argument |argument |

| |thesis |Rougher transitions |Some paragraphs out of |Paragraphs out of order/not |No paragraphs |

| |Smooth transitions | |order/not matching thesis |matching thesis |Missing transitions |

| | | |Rough transitions |Missing transitions | |

|Format / Mechanics |Few to no grammatical or |3-5 minor grammatical or spelling |9-6 grammatical or spelling |10 or more grammatical or |Multiple grammatical or |

| |spelling errors |errors (agreement, apostrophes, |errors: some major (comma |spelling errors: some major |spelling errors: many |

| |Correct MLA format in |etc.) |splices, fragments, etc.) |(comma splices, fragments, |major (comma splices, |

| |works cited page and in |Mostly correct MLA format |Incorrect MLA format |etc.) |fragments, etc.) |

| |parenthetical citations | | |Incorrect MLA format or missing|No attempt at MLA format |

| | | | |citations/works cited |or works cited |

|Language |Clear, coherent prose |Clear, coherent prose |Overwrought or confusing prose |Language hinders understanding |Language erratic and |

| |Good, |Slightly less precise word choices|Multiple problematic word |of argument |hinders argument |

| |specific—objective—word |Sentence lengths and structures |choices including loaded words |Many problematic word choices | |

| |choices |vary somewhat |Sentence lengths and structures|Sentence lengths and structures| |

| |Sentence lengths and | |very basic or repetitive |very basic | |

| |structures vary | | | | |

( Plagiarizes [Result = zero on paper]

( Does not cite minimum number of sources/articles [Failing Offense] Overall Grade: _______

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download