Comparison between FAIR and AIM

Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting ( evenhandedly) and Accuracy In Media (AIM), be two of the just about active media capture groups, who affectks to influence and encourage members of the media to fall by the wayside fair and objective nurture to the people, without injecting biases and personal opinions. FAIR contracts themselves as a national media watch group who offers well-documented criticism of media bias and censorship forever since they started with the cause in 1986 (F.A.I.R., 2007).On the other hand, AIM sees themselves as a grassroots citizens watchdog, which critiques botched and bungled news stories and sets the record straight on important edit outs that consume received slanted coverage (A.I.M., 2007). Simply put, they atomic number 18 twain(prenominal) against the mis learning that the media sometimes deliver to the people because of personal reasons, like biases, opinions and to a greater extent. further scrutinizing this two properly, the question w ould then be on who is able to entice more people regarding the slanted news and instruction of some media practicians and agencies. flavour closely on FAIRs characteristics, they say that they seek both the opinion of the journalists and the activists. They present the side of the journalist, whenever they have presented a bit of a biased denomination or information. They conduce the journalist a receive to defend themselves and be able to explain further why they have resorted to writing such article.They also present the side of the activists and the critics who notices the mistakes and the points where the journalists went out of line. This is to support a point of argument for the people, who usually wouldnt realize that they are receiving biased commentaries from the people they would often think to deliver an deaf(p) continue of the facts.Because of this, FAIR honors the line open between the journalists and the activists. Through them, they can keep a immutable dia logue so that they could be able to spiel things out for them. This then leaves a room for improvement for the journalists, especially if they consider what the activists say. With the help from FAIR, they would know whether what they are doing is right or wrong. Through constant communication, they are able to sharpen their senses to bring about truthful, unbiased pieces of information for the public.Another characteristic of FAIR is that they are encouraging the people to submit for the person responsible to change their ways, say, the media who gave biased information to the public. They are having a part where they propose a possible solution to a paradox and then ask the people to act in purchase order to crystalise that problem by following what they have suggested. An example would be petition them to call the person involve by grown that persons contact number. They would encourage the people to ask for an explanation why that media practitioner made such a biased com ment regarding a accredited topic.AIM on the other hand, sees that the media needs a watch dog, which is why they exist. They said that the news media dont seem to always concede out the right information, wherein they could be debaseing the people or giving out biased information vague by their personal opinions. alone looking closely at AIMs works, they are more on the political opinions of the media. They are more into scrutinizing that these people should not deliberate their political belief in what they are writing.This has become a distinguishing characteristic, since most of their discussions are on whether some media personnel are for the democratic or the liberal side. In addition to that, they tackle on some publications that they see to stir peoples minds with what they publish. They say that these publications exist to deliver straight, demanding hitting facts and information, and not to promote a certain belief or side they represent or endorse.In comparing the effectiveness of both FAIR and AIM, it can be seen that both of them are getting feedbacks from people, truism that what they are doing are really helping out in delivering the appropriate, unbiased information. This means that both of them prove that they are effective. But comparing them FAIR is able to communicate more with the people with regards to the wrong-doings of the media. This is because of the wide range of topics and information that FAIR gives and they are not as much as shadowed by the political stand of the media, as compared to that of AIM.In an article in the New York Times last July 3, 2007, writer Sheryl Stolberg has somewhat infused her thoughts in what she has written. The article was about President Bush deciding to commute the sentence of I. Lewis Libby younger who has committed a crime by lying to the FBI regarding an Iraq war issue (Stolberg, 2007). With Stolberg saying that the President seem to find the 30-month imprisonment for Libby as harsh, and that the movement was a test of will, she was clearly sympathizing with what President Bush is feeling, whether what she said was literal or not. She mentioned that President Bush was forced to give the decision, a affirmation clearly implying of her, injecting her own opinions.This article was taken by some media watch group negatively, saying that Sheryl Stolberg was violating the media ethics of delivering a truthful, unbiased news and information to the people. What she did was an act of showing her biases, which she was siding and sympathizing with President Bush. As a media practitioner, doing as such reduces her credibility to give truthful, unmarred information to the people.Conclusion res publica includes the peoples liberty to freely speak their minds, the freedom to constituent out their opinions whenever they want. But democracies freedoms also have limitations. This is applicable to media, where in order to get a true grasp of a story, the media practitioner, journali sts or reporters should be able to give the unbiased face of the story. In order to do so, they must set aside their own opinions and interests in order to give the appropriate information to the people. The medias role in democracy is the freedom of all people to access information. This information must be untainted with the media peoples opinions or biases, in order not to mislead the recipient of these pieces of information, which are the masses.ReferencesA.I.M. (2007). What is Accuracy In Media(AIM)? Retrieved July 4, 2007, from http//www.aim.org/static/19_0_7_0_CF.A.I.R. (2007). Media Views. Retrieved July 4, 2007, from http//www.fair.org/index.php?page=11Stolberg, S. G. (2007, July 3, 2007). For President, Libby Case Was a Test of Will The New York Times.