Bias in journalism isn’t about slanting headlines — it’s about missing context. Here’s how reporters work to keep coverage balanced and fair
By Hannah Kanfer — Granite State News Collaborative
When people talk about “bias in the news,” it often comes with a suspicion: the idea that reporters simply repeat what they’ve been told or, worse, intentionally slant the story.
The reality is far more complicated.
Why bias is complicated
Journalists are human and, like all humans, they carry their own perspectives, assumptions and blind spots. That does not mean their work is inherently biased. Instead, it means reporters must take extra steps to ensure their reporting is as fair and accurate as possible. That is why rigorous sourcing, fact-checking, and verification are essential parts of the job.
Bias happens when a story is presented only from one viewpoint without considering any other sides. If only one set of voices is included, or only one frame of a story is explored, the reporting risks becoming skewed.
Balanced reporting doesn’t mean giving every side equal weight no matter what, but it does mean providing a picture that’s as full as possible through multiple perspectives, credible sources, and a fair assessment of the facts.
Why omissions matter as much as words
Leaving out context can unintentionally tilt the story.
A cautionary example is the 2019 coverage of Nick Sandmann. A short video clip went viral showing Sandman, then a high-school student, wearing a “Make America Great Again” hat, standing face-to-face with Native American activist Nathan Phillips during the Indigenous Peoples March in Washington, D.C.
The initial framing suggested Sandmann was mocking or blocking Phillips. But longer footage later revealed a more complex situation: Sandmann and other students had first been taunted by a separate group, the Black Hebrew Israelites, and Phillips approached the students while drumming, which some saw as an attempt to calm tensions. Sandmann later said he was trying to remain calm and avoid escalation.
The first wave of media coverage was criticized as rushed and incomplete, with several major outlets later acknowledging they had failed to show the full context.
How to make a journalism piece balanced
Balanced reporting means going beyond a single perspective. It requires journalists to consider all the stakeholders involved in a story.
For example, if a company’s workers go on strike, interviewing only union members could create impressions that are incomplete. Reaching out to company leaders for comment, and talking with customers or local residents affected by the work stoppage, will provide a fuller picture.
To achieve balance, journalists can ask themselves:
What viewpoints are we including in the story?
Are any key perspectives or stakeholders missing from the story?
Is the story driven by facts rather than emotions?
How are we describing people, groups, or events?
Are adjectives consistent, or are some people presented more positively or negatively than others?
What about the framing, headlines and social posts?
The words chosen for titles and promotional text shape the first impression of a story. Are they as neutral as the article itself?
What balanced reporting looks like
A strong example of balanced reporting is the Pulitzer Prize-winning reporting by The Guardian and The Washington Post on the Edward Snowden leaks in 2013, which revealed government surveillance by the National Security Agency.
Rather than rushing the story, those journalists spent considerable time fact-checking NSA documents, consulting industry experts and verifying technical claims. They consistently sought and included responses from the NSA, the White House, and other agencies.
Reporters also provided essential context, explaining programs like PRISM and XKeyscore, their scope, and the government’s legal justifications, so readers could fully understand the context.
Ultimately, the reporting focused on clarity and accuracy, without resorting to sensationalism or bias.
What “bias” really means
When critics say the news media are biased, it’s worth asking: biased how?
All journalism involves choices: what to cover, whom to quote, and how to frame a story. But those choices aren’t made lightly. They are informed by standards of fairness, accuracy, and accountability.
Bias, in its clearest form, means leaving out important perspectives and presenting only one side of a story. Good journalism works against that by seeking out different voices, perspectives, and angles to provide as complete a picture as possible. That balance is not just a best practice, it's essential in today’s media environment, where distrust runs high and misinformation spreads quickly.
Bias in journalism doesn’t mean reporters abandon those standards. More often, it’s the result of the unavoidable human lens through which information is filtered. The safeguard against it is the rigorous process of sourcing, verifying, and questioning every claim, again and again, until the picture that emerges is as close to the truth as possible.
This story is part of Know Your News — a Granite State News Collaborative and NENPA Press Freedom Committee initiative on why the First Amendment, press freedom, and local news matter. Don’t just read this. Share it with one person who doesn’t usually follow local news — that’s how we make an impact.