So in my post earlier today about Winston Peters and the media’s response to his claims today, I said:
“This helps to make it easier to read between the lines of what they report in the mainstream media they work for.”
Frances Cook asked in response:
@matthewjpb Although I’m curious of what you think of reading between the lines for news reports – do you mean that in good or bad way?
— Frances Cook (@FrancesCook) February 21, 2014
So I thought I would take the chance to use more than 140 characters to try and explain what I mean.
One of the elements of social media that gets talked about a lot is how it allows MPs to present a more realistic view of themselves. It allows people to see them more as real people. This also applies to the media. In the past all we have seen of the people in the media, especially those in print media, is the written word on a page. This doesn’t really give us much of an insight into who they are. Or what their views on things are. By views I don’t just mean the issues, but also all the other elements that make them up as people. Now with twitter we can see more of their personality and views. We can learn about what they do to relax, what sports they plan, what sports teams they support. This all helps us form a view of them. These little things we learn also help us to try and decipher any bias they may have.
As much as they may all try, it is very hard for people to fully remove their bias from their reporting. So every little extra bit of information that allows readers/viewers to get a better idea of where the reporter is coming from is useful.
