task 2

1. Task 2 - Should factual writing contain
bias?
When talking about factual writing an issue that comes up time and time again is whether or
not factual writing should contain bias. Bias is essentially someone leaning towards one side of
an argument or promoting one belief over another. For example, a newspaper may be bias
towards a particular political party and therefore when reporting on stories they may use
language or actual content which supports their belief. For something to be unbiased they
would have a neutral standpoint and would report on points about both sides of the story,
instead of favouring one or the other.
It can be very hard to be unbiased because naturally, as humans, people tend to pick out
information that supports their beliefs, and are more likely not to include content that opposes
them. It can become a controversial subject because many people argue that in some cases
bias is a good things, for example in an interview with someone many people argue that bias
would be okay because it is focusing on that persons opinion and for them to not be able to do
this would be unfair as this is essentially the point of an interview. Also in instances such as
raising awareness for subjects such as child or animal abuse, it may be very useful to be bias in
favour of what is “morally” correct in order to provoke an emotional response in the viewer
which may lead to them helping in one way or another. This is where things get messy and
extremely controversial because where exactly do you draw the line and who decides what is
and isn’t morally correct? Some things are obvious such as the fact that it is wrong to abuse
children, but some do not have such a clear answer, for example should the government be
allowed to keep secrets from the public?
In my personal opinion, as a general rule of thumb I think that factual writing should largely
be unbiased as it should be up to the reader to formulate an opinion after being given the ‘full
story’ so to say. Obviously there is always going to be bias news sources and bias everything
really, but if something claims it is unbiased it should present both sides of the story and all
the points possible of both sides, even if that means that one side is obviously in the wrong or
not, because it should be up to the reader to make their opinion. I think that a news source
could become bias by trying to be unbiased, by not reporting everything of one side so that it
is more balanced with the other.
The reason I believe factual writing should be unbiased is because by being bias you are
essentially provoking a response and trying to convince someone else of your beliefs. When
stating these bias views you are doing so in the hope that others will agree with you, you are
not doing it to try and convince yourself, as you have already been convinced. I do not think
this is fair because I believe that it should be up to the individual as to whether they take one
side or another, and in order to do this effectively they must know the full story and
completely understand the situation.
However I do agree that in some situations bias may not be as big of an issue as with other s,
like I stated before in an interview. In an interview it gives someone the chance to state what
he or she believe and here I think bias is acceptable. I think it would be inhuman and
unrealistic to say bias should not exist in journalism at all because I believe people have the
right to opinion but I think when the writing is meant to be factual then it should take into
account all aspects and arguments and not be deceitful.