Essay 4 - Revision Essay

Slant in the Media


People make mistakes. It is a part of being human to be wrong every once in a while. But at whose expense or reputation? Henry Louis Gates, preeminent scholar and professor at Harvard University, was publicly humiliated when arrested in front of his home, even after providing photo identification. Although the arrest has been declared accidental and the charges against him have been dropped, reporters are making sure this case is being given the attention it deserves, sometimes letting their own biases show when they cover this controversial story. The situation was “regrettable and unfortunate,” as Gates and the police stated, yet newscasters, reporters and journalists are making sure that this case stays in the papers, some not afraid to show their biases. Katie Zezima, reporter for the New York Times, let small biases surface, even when her article seems balanced on a first read. Many have wondered how this would have been handled if it were someone other than Gates, or someone from another ethnic background or race, and when reading closely, it is clear that Zezima believes this mistake is not just an everyday accident, but a problem on everybody's part. When people make mistakes at the expense of others, it should be taken seriously and have a balanced portrayal in the media.

“Selection, Slanting and Charged Language,” an essay by Birk and Birk, states that our knowledge, both conscious and unconscious, is influenced by the “principle of selection.” What we select is what we notice, and this determines what serves as fact in our own system of knowledge. Each person has their own way of gathering information and selecting what is important, forming an impression of that information. Once we have gone through the principle of selection, Birk and Birk describe the “principle of slanting.” People “choose the words and emphasis that [they] shall use to communicate [their] meaning.” (Eschholz, 353). Slant can clearly be seen – through charged language, the emphasis of a word, and fact selection – when it is giving a negative or positive connotation. Slant allows anyone (especially journalists and advertisers,) to shape our knowledge and opinions on that knowledge, a dangerous concept for the everyday person because they lose their own ability to make decisions about the topic at hand. Although most articles, when quickly read, are thought to be balanced portrayals of the subject, they are actually including slices of information that convey a bias – a slant – on that subject. In some ways, slant can be harmful to readers who are not aware of how much influence the bias of an article can have on your own opinion. Zezima’s article about Gates is, for the most part, a very balanced article; however, some of her own opinion of the subject slips in, through charged words and fact selection:

Police said [he] refused to show identification. When told that Sgt Crowley was investigating a robbery, the police said Professor Gates yelled “Why because I’m a black man in America?” and accused the sergent of racism.

Zezima is picking and choosing words that will help justify Sgt. Crowley’s actions, presenting Gates as the bad guy when, by analyzing the situation and Crowley's actions, could undeniably be seen as an act of racial profiling on Crowley’s behalf. By using “accusing,” a charged word, Zezima is implying a negative connotation. The word “accusing” gives a negative connotation to the reader, as if Gates is instigating the situation and pointing fingers at an innocent police officer. The word “accusing,” – because it is giving off this negative connotation – is influencing how the reader should feel about the situation. Some readers may see the word accusing and say that Professor Gates is all to blame – even without any other facts or knowledge on the circumstance. When charged words such as accusing are being used, the reader is leaving their opinion in the fate of whose reporting: because this may be the first article they read about this incident, their opinion may be influenced by whoever is reporting and in whichever way their article is slanted.

Another example of charged language in Zezima’s article is the use of the word “frustrated.” She says, “Frustrated, Professor Gates asked for Sgt. Crowley’s name and badge number…” Upon reading this word for the first time, readers may not notice the amount of bias it is communicating. Frustrating also has a negative connotation, implying that Professor Gates is the one out of control, or soon to be out of control. The tone would have changed completely if the word frustrated were not included; therefore, the reader may see the word frustrated and gather their impression of the incident based on the word’s negative connotation. Instead of figuring out who is in the wrong in this situation, or if anyone is wrong in the matter, the reader can have that opinion made for them, through the use of charged words and charged language.

The reader can also have their opinion made through the use of fact selection. Although Zezima does use charged language in a way that supports the police and not Professor Gates, her fact selection, “verifiable facts [that are] deliberately selected… to produce an impression” (Escholz, 354) conveys a different image. For the most part, it is balanced and conveys only the tone of a reporter reporting about a case. However, her facts, in my opinion, help reinforce the idea that people should be more careful when they try to analyze someone else based on his/her own impressions and opinions, or else that mistake can be seen as more than just a mistake. At first, Zezima shares a balanced recollection of facts:

…Professor Gates said he showed the responding officer, Sgt. Crowley, photo identification, but he did not believe [Gates] lived at the home. Frustrated, [Gates] asked for Sgt. Crowley’s name and badge number, which he refused to give.

In this situation, anyone would feel harassed if someone were questioning their ownership of property. Required by law, police officers are supposed to give this information to those who request it. For an officer to refuse this right of any citizen is not only suspicious of his character, but also shows his lack of respect towards others; even though Crowley was suspicious of Gates, it is the law to show a badge. Although it is balanced, there are signs of slant within the facts Zezima highlighted in this report. In this example, Zezima allows the reader to infer something for themselves, but simultaneously makes it clear to the reader that Crowley’s actions were not okay. Embedded in the facts she has chosen, and the way she chose to represent them in her article, Zezima is giving us the report with a slant (which is most likely a subconscious choice on her part). By giving us this slice of information, Zezima is showing the reader – through her point of view – that it is insulting to Gates and others who have been profiled to have their character questioned. For some readers, profiling by the police may be something they've experienced. For others, Zezima is giving them insight into how a person would feel when this type of profiling occurs.

Maybe this terrible situation is nothing more than just a simple miscommunication. A statement later released ensures that this “regrettable and unfortunate” episode has been resolved, and Gates has been dropped from all charges. But, maybe – through Crowley and Gates’ own impressions, and through how Zezima uses slant within her article – there’s something more to it that we should all be paying attention to.