This next source is a news article extract taken from The
Mail Online. The Mail Online are already known for over exaggerating news
stories and information they have deducted from surveys they have carried out.
They have also come across as very bias in their information before when
discussing certain topics, not giving a fair balanced view on possible causes
to it in the first place. From the outset of this news article however,
contrastingly to the typical expectations of what The Mail Online are usually like,
it offers an alternative and a viewpoint on why young people are antisocial in
the first place.
It clearly suggests with use of statistics that "fatherless young people are 80.3% more likely to be involved in antisocial behaviour. This already states a different viewpoint to consider when thinking about why antisocial behaviour in young people is caused. It states that perhaps the initial causes are much closer to home than due to the negative representation by the media in the first place, in this case due to the absence of fathers. The claim suggested here is further backed up with statistics such as "76.4% more likely to take part in crime" as well as "69.1% more likely to take drugs", all relating back to the idea that this antisocial behaviour is caused due to the absence of fathers in young people’s lives. However, the news article does not clearly the state the origins of this survey, so perhaps once again this information has been exaggerated by the mail online, meaning this information is not as reliable as it would initially appear to be.
Overall, the issue suggested here by The Mail Online is that antisocial behaviour in young people is in fact caused by the absence of fathers and not due to influences by the media. It does however still mostly give a negative representation of young people. It makes no effort to suggest positives and successes of young people, but the difference between this and the BBC news article is that this attempts to justify these actions with another initial causes other than simply suggesting there is no reason for antisocial behaviour happening.
It clearly suggests with use of statistics that "fatherless young people are 80.3% more likely to be involved in antisocial behaviour. This already states a different viewpoint to consider when thinking about why antisocial behaviour in young people is caused. It states that perhaps the initial causes are much closer to home than due to the negative representation by the media in the first place, in this case due to the absence of fathers. The claim suggested here is further backed up with statistics such as "76.4% more likely to take part in crime" as well as "69.1% more likely to take drugs", all relating back to the idea that this antisocial behaviour is caused due to the absence of fathers in young people’s lives. However, the news article does not clearly the state the origins of this survey, so perhaps once again this information has been exaggerated by the mail online, meaning this information is not as reliable as it would initially appear to be.
Overall, the issue suggested here by The Mail Online is that antisocial behaviour in young people is in fact caused by the absence of fathers and not due to influences by the media. It does however still mostly give a negative representation of young people. It makes no effort to suggest positives and successes of young people, but the difference between this and the BBC news article is that this attempts to justify these actions with another initial causes other than simply suggesting there is no reason for antisocial behaviour happening.
Source? (The Mail Online): 6/10
Reliable Information?: 5/10
How Bias?: 4/10
No comments:
Post a Comment