One Wyoming Story – Two Bias Headlines

(OPINION: by Glenn Woods).

There is no doubt that news coverage is slanted, though various news organizations will all tell you that the other guy is biased, but not them.

Let's have a look at two very different headlines from two different Wyoming news outlets on the same topic.

THE STORY:
President Donald Trump and EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin have just recinded the 2009 EPA “Endangerment Finding” that has long served as the legal basis for federal regulation of carbon dioxide and other gases under the Clean Air Act.

HEADLINE FROM COWBOY STATE DAILY:
Wyoming Cheers End Of Obama-Era EPA Climate Change Rule.

HEADLINE FROM WYOFILE:
Trump dumps greenhouse gas ‘endangerment finding’ amid dire climate warnings.

While the Cowboy State Daily headline is one-sided, I'll give extra positive points and a lot of credit to them for doing all they could to bring in every point of view on this story. There were both positive and negative reactions to the announcement, and their story covered them equally.

WYOFILE, on the otherhand, leaned heavily toward the viewpoints of leftist environmental groups and unproven, even absurd, polling of the people of Wyoming. It is assumed that the Trump Administration is "anti-science," when, in fact, they are coming to their conclusions based on what scientists have told them. But the folks at WYOFILE can't bring themselves to look into that.

An example of their polling claims, "The vast majority of residents — 86% — “believe that climate change is happening,” according to last year’s Wyoming Survey on Climate, Water, and People." The problem with this is that while most people in Wyoming believe that climate change is happening, most Wyomingites also think that it is natural and not man-made.

When it comes to a story like this, a good news outlet will offer the public a report that is as balanced as it can be, even if the reporter and editors don't like one particular point of view. That way, you can read the story and come to your own conclusion, and not the conclusion that the publication wants you to come to. That is JOURNALISM 101.