Asynchronous/synchronous – Hybrid/Online
In Jürgen Habermas’ The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere, he suggests that public discourse radically changed in the 19th century. Whereas once private men of letters directed public discourse, a shift in the editorial function and a new profit motive based on advertiser revenue has greatly affected the way in which we understand the social reality. Corporate conglomerates and political parties have harnessed this transformation to shape public opinion. How do we develop opinions? Do you consume media solely based upon your political affiliations? Who shapes our opinions and why? What are their worldviews and ideologies? In this multifaceted assignment, we shall unpack the biases embedded within news reporting. To this end, we will mark the difference between opinion and fact.
Asynchronous Component Part One
For this asynchronous assignment, your peer group will peruse three databases in the Baruch online library: the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, and the New York Post. Independently, each member of your group must select at least two news articles from two databases that cover a unit/event/topic I assign to your group. You must compare an article that seems to have a liberal/democrat bias (NYT), and one that suggests a conservative/republican bias (NYP/WSJ). Then each member must review and annotate not only each database, but also both articles (three annotations per object of study). Each member must comment on at least two of their peers’ annotations. The aforementioned newspapers have been accused of bias over the years. Your annotations should speak to the following observations:
- What events/topics does each publication choose to cover — how and why?
- Pay close attention not only to the language, but more specifically, to the rhetorical gestures deployed in each article, including the headlines.
- Also, consider the placement/order of the articles in each edition. Is the organization a rhetorical mode? How does the news outlet draw attention to certain topics/articles?
- What political party, worldview, and ideology is suggested in the reporting? Is the essay biased or neutral?
- Did you discover anything new about the topic/event that you did not previously know? Did any of the information change your opinion? Did any of the articles make you question your preconceived notions? What did you learn?
Asynchronous Component Part Two
Please schedule a 60-minute Zoom meeting with your peer group, during which you shall debate the topic in a podcast/roundtable format, using the annotations as your proof. Firstly, establish your code of engagement during the debate. Irrespective of your political leanings, half your group must argue the liberal stance and the other group must argue the conservative stance, pointing to the supposed biases in the articles. The group managers will serve as moderators/discussion leaders. During your Zoom meeting, you must record and post a 15-minute debate on the discussion board on Brightspace under the “Debates” folder. The video should commence with a brief intro to the topic and an explanation of the code of engagement.
Synchronous Component – The Collective Fishbowl
Prior to our in-person/synchronous discussion of the reading that pertains to the articles/topic/events you addressed in your debate video, the class will watch that day’s scheduled recorded video and comment on the dynamics of the debate, particularly with respect to bias detection, rhetoric, and adherence to the code of engagement. This will serve as our introduction to the lecture and discussion of the day’s reading. During our discussion of the reading, we will view and analyze the annotations for the day to spur new conversations.