clusive, sources for the news media are bias. Therefore, even though a person may not be getting a reporter’s bias, the audience will receive a bias account because of the sources that are used for the story. Because of the competitive nature of today’s media, there is a premium placed on the “speed” of news reporting. The IBT is careful to critically question the assumption of objectivity when the medial relies on “official” sources. These “official” sources are often people or groups that are oftentimes well placed governmental official, professionals, or experts in the field. An example of the media using official sources would be a news team investigating the impact of the embargo on the people of Iraq. To find the most accurate information, these reporters may speak to a United Nations official or a military officer who has had experience in Iraq. Although these individual may have a perspective on the impact of the embargo, they certainly would project a certain institutional bias. Since “official” sources represent such a small percentage of any society, they cannot be relied on solely or exclusively for a sources of information. Evidence for the IBT has been found in studies conducted on news television shows. A three-year study of the news show “Nightline” was done to find out how many “official” sources were used as the basis for the news story during this time period. It was discovered, that up to 75% of the guests in the three-year span were either professionals or government officials, which helped give further credence to the IBT. The second major theory of media bias is the Economic Elite Bias Theory (EEBT). This theory is based on the so called the golden rule, “if you own the gold, you make the rules.” The basis of the EEBT rests on the theory that ownership and control of the media influences the objectivity of the re...
