Faries 1

Samuel Faries
UWRT 1102-001
Professor Huizar
23-OCT-16
Draft

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 ones that they have 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. I believe that the news is intertwining their own ideas and emotions
with facts, which in turn negatively effects gun rights. This is a problem but not only for firearm
enthusiasts [what is the problem?], [someway introduce the public before what and how they
are influenced] I believe that the news, telling their own stories influences the public in a way
that causes many arguments and controversy of information that in the end, should be strictly
truthful information any way. [maybe something like; not only for firearm enthusiasts, but for
the public who are negatively influences by news personal agenda]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 [Statistically] speaking, [add statistic] 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 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,
with a comparison [ran a ratio of] of 29 to 5 stories of gun control and gun rights, respectively.
(MRC) All together, these channels had 105 stories that were categorized as neutral meaning
not pulling for gun control or gun rights either one. 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

Faries 3

entire story. (MRC) So how does this effect the 34.9 million viewers? 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 way [way for what?]. 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. 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 control. How is this statement compared to the last one? Is it less preloaded and
less bias? Does it sound less interesting? 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

Faries 4

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.
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

Faries 5

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)