Balance and Fairness in Broadcasting News Is Expressed in Negative Terms, As Bias
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Balance and Fairness In Broadcasting News (1985-1994) by Judy McGregor Margie Comrie Massey University This research was funded by the Broadcasting Standards Authority and New Zealand on Air (Irirangi Te Motu). April 1995 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This research would not have been possible without the support of the Department of Human Resource Management, Faculty of Business Studies at Massey University. Thanks are due to Nigel Lowe for tireless work in the communications laboratory, to Dr Ted Drawneek of Computing Services for statistical analysis and advice in questionnaire design, to Marianne Tremaine and John Harvey for proofreading and support, to Christine Smith for cheerful secretarial assistance, and Louise Allen for bargraphs and budgets. Professor Philip Dewe has enthusiastically supported the research project, advised in questionnaire design and read drafts of the research report. A special thank you to Joanne TeAwa. This research is as much hers as it is ours. This research was funded by the Broadcasting Standards Authority and New Zealand on Air (Irirangi Te Motu). TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. Summary of Main Findings 1 Chapter One: The Fairness Factor 4 1. Scope of the research project 4 2. The Fairness Factor 5 2.1 Introduction 5 2.2 Political tradition: shooting the messenger 6 2.3 The New Zealand context 7 2.3.1 The television journalist's viewpoint 8 2.4 Recent political criticism 9 2.5 Parliamentary questions relating to broadcast 13 news 2.6 Researcher's evaluation 13 3. The Regulatory Environment 14 Chapter Two: Research Methodology 17 2.1 Introduction 17 2.2 Research questions 17 2.3 Research approach 17 2.4 Methodology 18 2.4.1 Areas of news studied 18 2.4.2 Sample 18 2.4.3 The classification of Holmes 22 2.4.4 Unit of analysis 22 2.4.5 Formulation of categories 22 2.4.6 Selection and training of coders 25 2.4.7 Reliability and validity 26 Chapter Three: Results: General 28 3.1 Introduction 28 3.2 Researchers' evaluations 28 3.3 General 28 3.3.1 Crime 29 3.3.2 Politics 29 3.3.3 Health 29 3.3.4 Maori 30 3.4 Story length 30 3.4.1 Summary 30 3.5 Geographic origin 30 3.5.1 Summary and researchers' evaluation 31 3.6 Placement of stories 32 3.7 Chit chat 32 3.8 Events orientation 32 3.9 Captions 33 3.10 Wallpaper footage and file footage of television news 34 3.10.1 Summary and researcher's evaluation 34 3.11 Type of news 34 3.11.1 Crime 34 3.11.2 Summary and researchers' evaluation 35 3.11.3 Politics 36 3.11.4 Researchers' evaluation 37 3.11.5 Health 37 3.11.6 Researchers' evaluation 37 3.11.7 Maori 38 3.11.8 Researchers' evaluation 39 Chapter Four: The Sourcing of Broadcast News 41 4.1 Introduction 41 4.2 Number of sources 42 4.3 Source identification 42 4.3.1 Summary and researchers' evaluation 44 4.4 Source speaking time 44 4.4.1 Summary and researchers' evaluation 45 4.5 Government and Opposition voices - testing incumbency 45 4.5.1 Summary and researchers' evaluation 50 4.6 Number of repeat sources 50 4.7 Overall sound quality and camera treatment for the 51 source 4.8 Interviews of sources in broadcast news 51 4.9 Ethnicity of sources 52 4.9.1 Summary and researchers' evaluation 53 4.10 Gender of sources 54 4.10.1 Number of sources by gender 54 4.10.2 Gender of source by subject matter 55 4.10.3 Speaking time by gender 55 4.10.4 Summary and researchers' evaluation 56 4.11 Nature of source 56 4.11.1 Crime 57 4.11.2 Health 57 4.11.3 Politics 57 4.11.4 Maori news 58 4.12 Unsupported assertions 58 4.12.1 Researchers' evaluation 59 Chapter Five: Controversy and Other Factors Impinging on Balance 61 and Fairness 5.1 Introduction 61 5.2 Level of understanding and whether the main 61 claim of the story has been supported 5.3 Controversy and its treatment 62 5.3.1 Introduction 62 5.3.2 Amount of controversy 62 5.3.3 Amount of controversy across time 62 5.3.4 Researchers' evaluation 64 5.3.5 Inclusion of sides in controversy 64 5.3.6 Fairness of inclusion across time 66 5.3.7 Weight given to different sides in the controversy 67 5.3.8 Treatment of each side by interviewer or host 67 5.3.9 Unavailability, previous or future availability 67 of sides in the controversy 5.3.10 Other stories on the controversy and their effect 68 on balance 5.3.11 Summary and researchers' evaluation 69 5.4 Use of emotional language and its effects on balance 70 5.4.1 Introduction 70 5.4.2 Use of emotional language over time 71 5.4.3 Researchers' evaluation 71 5.5 Special camera techniques 72 5.6 Special audio techniques 72 5.7 The creation of synthetic experience and its effects 72 5.7.1 Summary and researchers' evaluation 73 5.8 The "piece to camera" 73 5.8.1 Introduction 73 5.8.2 Some attributes of stories containing a piece 74 to camera 5.8.3 Researchers' evaluation including qualitative 74 analysis of three individual stories 5.8.4 Summary and researchers' evaluation 76 5.9 Dealing fairly with each person 76 5.9.1 Introduction 76 5.9.2 Results of whether subjects of stories are 77 treated justly and fairly 5.9.3 Summary and researchers' evaluation 78 5.10 Distinction between factual reporting and comment, 78 opinion and analysis 5.10.1 Introduction 78 5.10.2 Results of the distinction between fact 78 and opinion 5.10.3 Reasons for the failure to distinguish 79 between fact and opinion 5.10.4 Researchers' evaluation 79 Chapter Six: Issues raised for public debate 81 6.1 Introduction 81 6.2 Trends over time 82 6.3 Changes in the subject areas of news 82 6.4 Plurality and diversity in the news 83 6.5 The 'blending' of news on television 84 6.6. Significant points for individual broadcasters 84 6.6.1 Morning Report 84 6.6.2 Television New Zealand 84 6.6.3 TV3 85 6.6.4 Mana News 85 6.7 Implications for the codes of broadcasting 85 6.8 Limitations 86 6.9 Summary 87 6.10 Future research directions 87 References 88 Appendix: Coding Questionnaire Document 91 LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES Page No. Table 1 Sample dates for television 20 Table 2 Sample dates for Morning Report 21 Table 3 Sample dates for Mana News 21 Table 4 Subject area of news by broadcaster 29 Table 5 Where stories originated 31 Table 6 What prompted the story? 33 Table 7 What is the story concerned with? 33 Table 8 Number of sources and average number per story 41 Table 9 Identification of sources both cited and speaking for themselves 43 Table 10 Identification of sources speaking only for themselves 43 Table 11 Identification of sources cited only 43 Table 12 Source speaking time for Government and Opposition 46 Graph 1 TV One news: Government and Opposition speaking time 48 Graph 2 Holmes: Government and Opposition speaking time 48 Graph 3 TV3 features: Government and Opposition speaking time 48 Graph 4 TV3 news: Government and Opposition speaking time 49 Graph 5 Morning Report news and features: Government and Opposition 49 speaking time Graph 6 Mana News: Government and Opposition speaking time 49 Table 13 Ethnicity of sources - excluding "unknown" category 53 Table 14 Gender of source 54 Table 15 The gender of identifiable sources 54 Table 16 Male sources for different subject areas 55 Table 17 Total speaking time and average speaking time for males and 55 females Table 18 Percentage of stories containing controversy 62 Table 19 TVNZ: Percentage of stories containing controversy 63 Table 20 Morning Report: Percentage of stories containing controversy 63 Table 21 TV3: Percentage of stories containing controversy 64 Table 22 Mana News: Percentage of stories containing controversy 64 Table 23 Fairness of inclusion of sides in controversy for all stories 65 Table 24 Fairness of inclusion of sides in the controversy for each 65 programme Table 25 Percentage of stories unfair in terms of inclusion across time 66 Table 26 Indications of unavailability, future and past availability 68 in stories coded as unfair Table 27 Other stories in the controversy and their effect on balance 68 Table 28 Percentage of stories containing emotional language 70 Table 29 Percentage of stories where emotional language causes imbalance 71 Table 30 Percentage of stories containing emotional language across time 71 Table 31 TVNZ: percentage of stories found to be unjust or unfair 77 Table 32 TVNZ: percentage unclear distinction between fact and opinion 79 SUMMARY OF MAIN FINDINGS Of the total of 915 stories sampled across four broadcasters (TVNZ, TV3, Morning Report and Mana News) 39% were political stories, 25.8% related to crime and 16% were health stories. Of the 176 Maori stories, 126 were broadcast by Mana News and coded as Maori stories. Only 50 Maori stories were broadcast by the other three broadcasters taken together. Maori stories formed 19.2% of the sample. Increases and decreases in the subject areas sampled were recorded during the years 1985-1994. These changes are calculated by comparing the four subject areas with each other and do not reflect proportional increases within bulletins over time.