Gun control is one of the most controversial topics in America today; the liberal side of the news wants more gun control in order to protect the children and others that are put into danger while the conservative side wants to bring in the Second Amendment in the argument. There are pros and cons to this topic that can be seen on both sides. The first article is “How Colorado Gun-Control Advocates Beat the N.R.A.” written by Eli Stokols in The New Yorker. The second article is “Trump officials advised to get concealed carry permits in wake of left-wing public harassment” by Dave Urbanski in The Blaze. Both articles have included the bias of selection of sources; bias by placement; and bias by story selection. The fact-checks are fairly short while one essay has many facts while the other is mostly is full of quotes.
Each news articles have bias by selection of sources. Bias by selection of sources means that the articles are “including more sources that support one view over another” (studentnewsdaily.com). In Stokols’s article, he includes more quotes and information on the pro-gun-control side, while he only includes two viewpoints and aftermaths from the gun-rights groups. For example, Stokols uses a quote at the end of the article from Tom Sullivan who is a father who has lost a child due to a school shooting and he states, “I applaud those Florida students for what they’re doing…I welcome them into the fight, because that’s what this is going to be” (newyorker.com). Stokols uses Sullivan at the beginning of the article as well, so that Stokols can show that he has more empathy towards the “leftist” side of the argument. Urbanski’s article showcases a majority of sources that depict the protestors that harass the Cabinet members. Most of the Urbanski’s source of news is usually embedded within the sentence itself. For example, when he states the sentence, “Homeland Security warned agency employees about threats to their personal safety in an email over the weekend” (Urbanski, theblaze.com). The embedded words in the sentence take the reader back to the same website which is known to be on the “right” side and tends to have a more conservative audience.
The next type of bias is bias by placement. Bias by placement is “a pattern of placing news stories so as to downplay information supportive of either conservative views or liberal views” (studentnewsdaily.com). In Stokols’s article, he uses bias by placement by stating different political news from Colorado and tying them in together to showcase on how pro-gun-control has won in politics in that state. For example, Stokols states that “After receiving the Parkland news alerts last week, Sullivan testified against the latest effort to roll back those measures, a proposal in the state’s Republican-controlled Senate that would expand concealed-carry rights in Colorado” (newyorker.com). Stokols used this bias by displaying this news story that so many people, left and right, can get a sense of why he is writing this article and to show how other states are taking action. In Urbanksi’s article, he gives a reader a list of news articles, which a majority of the articles are from The Blaze, that can get the reader to see what kind of people that liberals usually are in the real world. The beginning of the list states, “Leftist outrage – stemming from illegal immigrant children getting separated from their parents at the U.S.-Mexico border – has boiled over into a number of recent incidents…” (Urbanski, theblaze.com). This list takes out why the Cabinet members are being harassed this way and solely focuses on each incident into giving a reason why each member needs to carry permit. The news stories that are located in here are also solely focused on giving liberals a bad reputation when they are trying to get their opinions crossed and not helping the members of Cabinet see why they are being treated the way they are being treated in the real world.
The third type of bias is bias by story selection. Bias by story selection is “a pattern of highlighting news stories that coincide with the agenda of either the Left or Right while ignoring stories that coincide with the opposing view” (studentnewsdaily.com). Stokols mostly focuses on the liberalist news stories in his article, but he does not completely ignore the other side by stating their viewpoint after one of the story selection. Stokols’s article is mostly focused on the story selection that states, “…Colorado’s stricter measures, including universal background checks and a ban on magazines of more than fifteen rounds, remain law” (Stokols, newyorker.com). He then follows with the article of other stories about Sullivan and how gun rights advocates reacted to the Colorado laws. Urbanski completely ignores the liberal side of the argument within his article. He does not include any viewpoints from the opposing side but continues to ramble about which incident happened where and what took place at the incident. Urbanski includes a quote from Mark Smith who is an author that sides with the gun rights advocates stated, “…while he doesn’t believe Waters ‘wishes violence on anyone, including on Trump supporters, the reality is her rhetoric that liberals should ‘harass’ Trump supporters could easily be misconstrued by someone predisposed to criminal violence as encouragement to commit violence on Trump supporters and staff’” (theblaze.com). Bringing forth these examples about the incidents that happened can showcase on why not only Trump officials need firearm protection, but also to why everyone else in America needs firearm protection in their own homes.
Fact-checking an Urbanski article is as easy as it can be since he links all the sources within the statement. But for the sentence, “Homeland security warned agency employees about threats to their personal safety in an email over the weekend” (Urbanski, theblaze.com), the statement was a little uncertain about how true it really is. Well, clicking on the link, it led me to another The Blaze article that is specifically about the email and what the email contained. Then there was another link embedded in another sentence. Clicking on that link, led to the website of CNN. How reputable is CNN for news? According to the website Media Bia/Fact Checker said, “We rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to misinformation and failed fact checks from guests and pundits” (mediabiafactcheck.com). The website also rated CNN is being a more left bias news source which is funny since The Blaze is considered to be on the far right side of the spectrum for a news source. Since they were undecided on whether or not CNN was a highly regarded website for the correct information. The best stance on whether or not this statement is true is that it is mostly true due to the fact that making up a statement that can go as far as stating an email was sent to Trump officials is little too out there. Plus, if an author is called out for putting out any misinformation there is not stopping the author of the article to make updates so that the reader can get the accurate information instead of stating fake news everywhere.
While reading the Stokols’s article, there was a poll that caught my attention that should be fact-checked or not. Polls are easy to come up especially if it is only made out of a certain amount of the people. The statement being fact-checked is, “A Quinnipiac Univerity poll released this week found that sixty-six percent of American voters supported stricter gun control laws, a fourteen percent increase since 2015” (Stokols, newyorker.com). Nope, you did not read that wrong, the newspaper with an editor and everything let Stokols spell University wrong. That was one factor as to why it was dire to fact check this statement. The second factor was that it did not have an embedded link anywhere or a source available that lead to the numbers. That means if the reader wants to see it is true, they have to look up the university on the internet to find the exact poll that was mentioned. After looking up Quinnipiac University poll, that was the first website to pop up in the search results. Then after following the date that the article was published, the audience can easily see that the exact poll mentioned in the article is sitting there in broad daylight. The statement is as true as it can be. Since it was so easily accessible to anyone to has a computer and it is an educational URL which adds some bonus points into the mix of being a reputable source.
When reading any news article, there is always going to be doubt about whether or not it is fake news. The articles that anyone reads also depends on what side of the political spectrum they are and how bias they are towards that side. There are three main biases that everyone should look out for when reading or listening or even watching the news. Bias by placement is when the author puts in other news stories that could try to denounce the importance of the opposing viewpoints related to the type of news in the article. Bias by story selection is when the writer is punctuating other news stories that go with the political agenda in the article while still ignoring the opposing side. Then there is bias by selections of sources, this is when the author decides to grab different pieces of information specifically from other newspapers or news stations that have the same views as the writer. The political system that we have today can really be misconstrued depending which media outlet decides to post a certain article or subject. Then there are also instances that can happen where false information is displayed everywhere that false information can eventually manipulate what the viewers on what side they should take in politics. Every citizen should be notified of which news station or which newspaper or even which news podcasts spread the fake news so that when something really big happens there is no miscommunication on any side of the spectrum.