There are many factors that should be reviewed when entering into a discourse about the polarity that exists between the news that media outlets report and the way that they set their agenda. In the case of Bill Cosby and the allegations of sexual assault made against him, there exists a multitude of variables that play into why and how the publicity of the case was staunched. Before examining the coverage of the case it should be noted that Cosby is not the standard, his story is an example of someone who is undeniably against the norm (to a certain extent). The image and reputation he has built over the past years is a part of why the case flew under the radar for so long. It is the same reason why the first sexual assault allegation made against him was ignored.

I believe that when the news first broke in 2005 the story was adequately reported by the news. They presented facts and title conjecture about the events that had happened and they did not report anything that couldn’t be verified. However, the promotion behind the story was, in my opinion, purposefully weak. It wasn’t until recently that there was public outrage over the allegations made against Cosby and some of that outcry was directed at journalists who hadn’t taken the opportunity to question Cosby of any direct wrongdoing.

Cosby’s situation sheds light on one of the flaws within news coverage. There is a conflict of interest between journalism and the stories that are chosen by media outlets to be disseminated. I believe that most journalists would agree that stories based in fact and given fair coverage relative to the importance of the

From a journalistic stand point, I believe that stories should be rooted in facts and coverage should be given to stories relative to their importance in our everyday lives. From the stand point of a media outlet, I would be more interested in pushing a story at the most opportune time with regards to how much money can be made.