Faries 1

Samuel Faries
UWRT 1102-001
Professor Huizar
23-OCT-16
Opinion or Truth

Though many people would say that generally main news channels are unbiased
professionals. I would say they have an exception of being very biased and one sided when
speaking about gun control. News channels, in some ways, tell their own stories when it comes
to mass shootings by telling partial information or misleading facts of the shooting to bring
benefits or necessity of gun control to the mind of their viewers. This is a problem because this
negatively educates the regular viewer of certain news channels, often times, with incorrect
information on firearms. Which leads too many people supporting gun control off of biases and
previously mentioned, facts that are simply not true.
In Effects of News Media Messages About Mass Shootings on Attitudes Toward Persons
with Serious Mental Illness and Public Support for Gun Control Policies, Emma E. McGinty
states, gun control advocates view the aftermath of mass shootings as a window of opportunity
to garner public support for gun control policy (McGinty, 494). She goes into more detail by
saying gun control policy options are limited by recent Supreme Court rulings also gun
control laws in the United States [must] target specific categories [such as] dangerous people
or dangerous weapons [to get around the standing restrictions]. (McGinty, 494) I propose that
the news channels should have a very strong distinction between hard news and opinionated
news much stronger than what is implemented now. For many people that watch the news it can
get hard to understand when news hosts are relaying information or their own opinion, but in my

Faries 2

experience it is often at the same time. This brainwashes the viewers so to speak, by making
the facts blur with opinions.
The problem is that people that are uneducated are spoon fed false information, this
causes people to have a resentment towards firearms, as well as anyone who uses them in their
profession. The news producing false information is pointless, what good does it do other than
bring them more viewers, how dose giving the people something to strongly disagree with help
us work together. There is such a divide in Americans today and I say that the news having an
unclear lines of opinion and facts has a lot to do with it when it comes to people having
resentment in others. This is a problem not only for firearm enthusiasts this is a problem for
Americans because it causes many arguments and controversy of information that in the end,
should be strictly truthful information any way.
Would it be a surprise to you to know that in 2015 ABC, NBC, and CBS news channels
were three of the top four largest broadcasting, and cable news channels? Generally speaking,
people tend to view the same news channels due to their opinions on the way the news is
covered. Most viewers will not regularly watch a channel they consistently disagree with. In
total, ABC, NBC, and CBS news channels are regularly watched by 34.9 Million people. The
Media Research Center, an organization that claims their purpose is to create a media culture in
America where truth and liberty flourish reports that CBS, the second largest news channel, also
the most adamant about gun control, released 44 stories that supported gun control while only
covering 2 stories that supported gun rights in 2013. (MRC) NBC, the largest news channel,
covered 26 stories where gun control was supported compared to 5 stories where gun rights were
supported. (MRC) ABC, aired a ratio of 29 to 5 stories of gun control and gun rights,
respectively. (MRC) All together, these channels had 105 stories that were categorized as

Faries 3

neutral meaning not pulling for gun control or gun rights. How this is not biased, how can this
be informing people of facts and not tilting the story? However, in the news culture there is a
theory called the story-angle method this is where unbiased facts get told in a way that the
conversation begins to take a position on the matter. The Media Research Center suggests that
even in stories that are considered neutral, reporters comments can change the angle of the
entire story. (MRC) So, how does taking facts and presenting them in a consistently unequal way
influence the opinions of the 34.9 Million People? I believe that presenting gun control as an
answer in more than 90% of stories related to firearms makes the viewers believe it to be the
only answer to all the terrible things that the hear pertaining to firearms.
As you can see by the data, many news channels place their opinions within their stories
and only consistently show one angle of the information. In many cases, the angle of the news is
tilted by underlying opinions that can be seen quite clearly. For example, in MRC article, Tom
Costello From NBC started the night off with In Colorado, still haunted by the Aurora and
Columbine massacres, the governor of that western pro-gun state also said, its time to begin a
discussion about sensible gun control....Tonight, with dozens dead, including so many children,
the debate over guns is back. (MRC) Reading this implies that Colorado being a pro-gun state is
dangerous and a key factor in the shootings that happened. How does Colorado being a pro-gun
state add anything to the fact of the shooting? The person that committed the crime is a criminal
how does the fact that Colorado being a pro-gun state change the fact that a criminal committed a
crime? In my opinion I think that the more unbiased approach should have been taken when
presenting their audience with facts, instead of a preloaded lecture. To you as a reader is there a
difference between that approach and a more factual approach. Such as, In Colorado, still
haunted by the Aurora and Columbine shootings, the governor is discussing options of gun

Faries 4

control. How is this statement compared to the last one? Is it less preloaded and less bias? Does
it sound less interesting? The news draws attention to their programs by adding non-essential
information to catch the eye of their viewer. How could this confuse uneducated people of facts
and information? It does a lot and it results in people strongly disagreeing with people on
incorrect information. How does this help anyone?
Marc Trussler and Stuart Soroka researched weather people payed more attention to good
news or bad news by conducting an experiment. The experiment was people were asked to use a
special computer so that their eye movement could be monitored when clicking on the computer,
they were told that this was needed to pave the way for the phones and computers that can scroll by
seeing what your eye is focused on, they were told this to make sure the tests were kept unbiased.
The test were actually monitoring weather the subjects preferred to read positive news reports or
the drastic negative news reports. At the end of the tests Marc Trussler and Stuart Soroka were
surprised to see that most people selected the negative news over the positive news however, when
taking a survey those same people that had watched the negative news over the positive news
selected that they would rather see more positive news air. I believe that news channels often times
try to spice up their articles even by putting overly dramatic information or fluff in their article to
get more publicity. I propose that the news channels push out news of mass shooting and title
them with large and biased titles such as the example above, adding extra and non-essential
information. Almost as if they pick and choose which stories to tell, again intertwining there
opinion on the matter. This is because the news channels make money off of their advertisements
the more viewers the channel has the more they can charge to place an advertisement on their
channel.

Faries 5

Yet another example of just what influence do the viewers take from the news and how
they portray it. Do you think that crimes involving firearms have increased over the last 17
years? If so, how do you know that the firearm related crime has went up? Most people would
say that the amount of firearm related crimes has definitely went up over the last 17 years
because it is shown more and more on the news. I know that I personally was very shocked to
find out that firearm related crimes are at an all-time low in almost 20 years. How does this
information relate to the news having a bias on gun control? How does this conflict with the way
firearm related crimes are put on the news today? When I analyze this data it speaks volumes to
me about how the media influences the public. It also makes me realize how many stories the
news leaves out because they are less beneficial to them. How much of the news is based off of
an opinion of what should be placed on the air? I ask this question because if the news had no
biases in it and with the crime rate involving firearms at an all-time low why do the viewers of
the news seem to feel that the occurrence of the firearm related crime airs on the news more
often than in the past?
How could the news channels influencing the viewers effect much more than just gun
control? The news is very much a part of everyones everyday life. How often do you watch the
news? Many people watch it every day. How uninformed would you be if the news that you
watched everyday was wrong? Do you see the responsibility that the news stations have? Can
you trust what you see on the news? Throughout this project I have realized how much the news
influences our everyday life not just in the firearms aspect of it and I strongly believe that the
news channels portrays their own stories to some extent, which greatly influences their viewers
with skewed information and biases.

Faries 6

Sources
(1) "ABC, CBS, NBC Slant 8 to 1 for Obama's Gun Control Crusade ..." Media Research
Center. N.p., n.d. Web. 23 Oct. 2016.
http://www.mrc.org/media-reality-check/abc-cbs-nbc-slant-8-1-obamas-gun-controlcrusade
(2) Kohut, Andrew. "Despite Lower Crime Rates, Support for Gun Rights ..." Pew Reserch
Center. N.p., 15 Apr. 2015. Web. 23 Oct. 2016.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/04/17/despite-lower-crime-rates-support-forgun-rights-increases/
(3) McGinty, EE, DW Webster, and CL Barry. "Effects of News Media Messages About Mass
Shootings on Attitudes Toward Persons with Serious Mental Illness and Public Support for
Gun Control Policies." The American Journal of Psychiatry. 170.5 (2013): 494-501. Print.
http://uncc.worldcat.org/oclc/841490827
(4) "Public Attitudes Toward Gun Control | Pew Research Center."Pew Research Center: U.S.
Politics & Policy. Pew Research, 14 Dec 2012. Web. 23 Oct 2016.
http://www.people-press.org/2012/12/14/public-attitudes-toward-gun-control/
(5) "2/02 How Media Distorts The Gun Control Debate | GOA News." GOA. 8 Oct 2008. Web.
23 Oct 2016. http://www.gunowners.org/op0205.htm
(6) "The Medias Effect on Gun Violence and Gun Control | United States Men's National Team
Blog." Sites at Penn State - WordPress | powered by WordPress. 24 Apr 2014. Web. 23 Oct
2016. http://sites.psu.edu/jmdenglishblog/2014/04/24/the-medias-effect-on-gun-violenceand-gun-control/
(7) Larimore, Rachel . "The media keeps misfiring when it writes about guns.." Slate Magazine
- Politics, Business, Technology, and the Arts. Www.slate.com, 16 Jun 2016. Web. 23 Oct
2016.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/06/the_media_keeps_misfirin
g_when_it_writes_about_guns.html

Faries 7

(8) "Opinions on Gun Policy and the 2016 Campaign | Pew Research Center." Pew Research
Center: U.S. Politics & Policy.Pew Research, 26 Aug 2016. Web. 10 Oct 2016.
http://www.people-press.org/2016/08/26/opinions-on-gun-policy-and-the-2016-campaign/
Useful Hyperlinks
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJmFEv6BHM0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ospNRk2uM3U
Examples of influential people that falsely educate others and make important decisions that
affect everyone. (Similar to what the news is doing)