The topic of genetic modification can be contentious for a lot of reasons: environmental, economic, social, and ethical. But bias isn't necessarily a bad thing. A resource can be biased but still contain useful and credible information. The problem lies in those resources that that are not upfront about their political or social agenda, are disrespectful of their opposition, and that make arguments and statements without backing them up with facts or research.
This page will help you evaluate for bias in your sources and be thoughtful about those you finally choose to use in your assignment.
Looking at a sample article, "How to Stop Rogue Gene-Editing of Human Embryos?" let's do some analysis of its bias.
The New York Times is an award-winning newspaper with a track record for good factual reporting. Though the newspaper has a liberal bias, this particular topic of gene editing human embryos is not necessarily contentious along liberal/conservative lines. The article is about the views of scientists and scientific organizations concerns about gene editing of human embryos, and it does indeed go out and directly ask these people. For getting this side of the picture, this would be a good source. If we want to know more about the argument in favor of increased experimentation with editing human embryos (which seems to be very much in the minority), we'll need to go find a different source.
Everyone has biases and no publication can be entirely neutral, though some are more biased than others. These resources can help you detect and evaluate for bias in different news media sources.
Check out these other pages in our Research Guides, or ask a librarian!
|Text (603) 556-8883|
|Call (603) 641-7306|
|Make an Appointment|