Monday, September 22, 2003

Biased Non-Sequitirs

BOTW from today, September 22, 2003 has an excellent blurb entitled, Inverted Pyramid Scheme demonstrating how media injects its bias into reporting through the use of non-sequitirs.

We've been in journalism for most of our adult life, but even we crusty old veterans can learn something new from time to time. Back when we were learning how to write news stories, we were instructed in the "inverted pyramid"--i.e., you start with the most important part of the story and gradually work down to less important elements. That way if an editor is pressed for space, he can simply cut from the bottom.

What no one ever told us was what comes after the point of the period: a total non sequitur. An example is this Associated Press dispatch, which begins: "A sister and brother were being held Saturday in the death of a baseball fan who was shot during a stadium parking lot dispute after attending a Dodgers-Giants game, police said." This is followed by some details about the shooting, information about the suspects and the victim, and the reaction of the Dodgers. So far, so good. Then the non sequitur:

The Giants won the game 6-4.

There's no indication, however, that the shooting had anything to do with the score of the game.

Then there's this Reuters dispatch about a tabloid's claim that Saddam Hussein was negotiating a surrender: "The U.S. military on Sunday denied a British media report that Saddam Hussein had offered money and information on weapons of mass destruction in return for safe passage to the ex-Soviet republic of Belarus," reads the first paragraph. Fine. Then more information about the report, quotes from the military denying it, background information on the hunt for Saddam, a fact of two about Belarus--and then this complete change of subject:

The United States, which invaded Iraq in March citing a danger from weapons of mass destruction, has said it would not negotiate with Saddam. It has so far failed to find any evidence of nuclear, chemical or biological arms.

Weapons of mass destruction have nothing to do with the story, but they did provide an opportunity for Reuters to sneak in its usual anti-American editorial commentary. Oh well, we'll have to try this non sequitur thing out one of these days.

Arafat won a Nobel Peace Prize in 1994.

No comments: