4.5 Investigate the source: Bias

Recognize types of bias

Biases can be driven by commercial interests, the influence of a publisher or publication’s audience, or personal beliefs, such as the political or religious beliefs of an author. Below we have listed seven common types of bias:

Article selection

All publications choose which articles to publish and how much to emphasize them. However, when the article selection process distorts what the audience perceives as important or true, this becomes a form of bias. For example, editors may place new articles with still-developing stories more prominently than they do follow-up articles that complete the picture.^[1] Similarly, scholarly articles that try to reproduce the results of prior research have a harder time getting published than articles with new research questions.

The idea of being “above the fold” is something that pertains to article selection and bias in general. Above the fold is a term that refers to what is physically above the fold of a newspaper. While newspapers have become next to obsolete in today’s digital society the idea of the phrase still stands. News networks decide what is on the front page, and they decide which articles are important enough to be on the front page.

Framing

Even if an article’s claims are technically true, the way that they are presented may be misleading.^[2] This is called framing: the way an author manipulates the context around an argument to promote their own interpretation. Biased framing often occurs in articles about controversial issues, but it can happen in various contexts. For example, framing can take the form of clickbait, when a publication makes an article seem more interesting by using a sensational headline to attract readers. Another example is this research article around framing in the COVID-19 news cycle.

Framing can also occur within an article, such as when an author provides a conclusion that is not actually supported by their evidence. Authors may intentionally frame their story to favor their position, but occasionally misleading framing is caused by poor reasoning or ignorance on the part of the author. You find this a lot in news media, but framing bias can also appear in scholarly contexts.

Framing is common within news media. News media companies, such as CNN, Fox News, and MSNBC, often have commercial agendas that might impact the way they share news. This might mean a news outlet purposely leaving out an important statistic in their news story because the statistics directly counteract the message they are trying to send. Researchers at the University of Rochester have begun to use a machine learning technique called multiple correspondence analysis to compare media bias between a plethora of different news outlets. One thing they found was that different outlets used subtle word changes in their headlines when discussing the same issue, for example, “when covering abortion issues, Reason tends to use the term ‘abortion law,’ while CNN underscores its ideological position by using the term ‘abortion rights.’” ^[3] We as consumers have the power to choose what we look at on the internet and the news we decide to consume.

Absence of balance

When an article presents only one side of a story, event, or issue without considering other relevant viewpoints, this can lead to an absence of balance. Examples of an absence of balance include telling only a portion of a story or not reporting the full context to avoid information that conflicts with the author’s point of view. Aside from excluding information, balance can also be skewed through the use of emotionally loaded language that clearly favors or disparages one position.

Sometimes authors can fall into a false balance. This happens when authors give equal coverage to perspectives that are not equally supported by facts, in an effort to appear balanced.^[4] However, this gives the false impression that both perspectives are equally important and valid.

Flawed sourcing

Flawed sourcing is when an article reports information without supporting it with context and references. This type of bias typically occurs due to a lack of good research practice. For example, the author may not have searched for sources extensively enough, missing key information about their topic. Alternatively, an author may not indicate where the information in their story came from, even when they have consulted sources they should reference. Finally, even when references are provided, an author may be using unreliable sources.

Note: sometimes a journalist or researcher will reference an anonymous source⁠—a person known to the author but not identified to the public to protect the source’s privacy. If an author clearly states they have used an anonymous source, this is not a sign of flawed sourcing.

Conflicts of Interest

Conflicts of interest are “when an entity or individual becomes unreliable because of a clash between personal (or self-serving) interests and professional duties or responsibilities.”^[5] Sometimes an author or publisher’s personal, political, or business relationships may affect the objectivity of their work. Check if any funding information or corporate ties to the project are listed, and consider whether those ties are likely to impact how the research is presented. You can typically find this information by reading the “sponsors” or “special thanks” section at the end of an article or elsewhere on their website. In some cases, you may find a section explicitly titled “potential conflicts of interest.” In other cases, this information may not be clearly listed and you will have to search for it elsewhere online.

For example, the article “Impact of cocoa flavanol intake on age-dependent vascular stiffness in healthy men,” is funded in part by “an unrestricted grant from Mars, Inc.” (the makers of M&M’s and other candy). It asserts that flavanols found in cocoa may help lower blood pressure; however, because of the article’s association with Mars, its results should be carefully compared with other sources. The article doesn’t assert that simply eating chocolate impacts blood pressure, but the cocoa flavanols that are the focus of the study are a component of cocoa-based nutritional supplements sold by Mars, Inc. Therefore, the researchers have a clear conflict of interest because their research is sponsored by Mars.

Industry support is a common source of research funding in many fields, which may be a conflict of interest for researchers. This doesn’t necessarily invalidate an author’s work, but you will need to determine whether those conflicts affected how their research was carried out and reported.

Tone

Tone can be biased in the way the author uses words and phrases to influence a reader’s perceptions of and reactions toward a topic. Tone can be manipulated in many ways, such as:

• Word choice: when the author’s choice of words gives a topic a positive or negative connotation. Compare positive words such as youthful, smile, proud with negative words such as childish, smirk, gloating.
• Sensationalism: twisting the context of a story to maximize the emotional impact for readers, or to overemphasize the importance of a situation or topic.
• Mudslinging: the use of misleading or insulting statements to harm or discredit an individual or group’s reputation.
• Opinions presented as facts: presenting unverified information as fact without making clear that the information is subjective, unconfirmed, or only an opinion.
• Facts presented as opinions: when the author ignores the available evidence for facts that contradict their position.

Confirmation Bias

Everything that is touched by humans has some form of bias. This isn’t necessarily a problem, but being aware of bias is essential. Bias becomes a problem when it gets in the way of accurately reporting on an issue, topic, or event. Unless you are researching public perception, you should seek out sources that discuss your topic as objectively as possible.