Berkeley, which represents hippies, craziness and openness, was the first place I stepped foot in in the U.S.; this is the place I am going to stay for one year.
At first, the unfamiliarity of the campus, the absurdity of the city and the sluggishness of the California style of services overwhelmed me.
Yes, adaptation takes time, but finally, I got used to the scenes of the homeless and mentally disabled wandering on the street, the single, old weird protestor standing and shouting in front of the campus main gate every day.
That is life in Berkeley.
Then it suddenly came — the 911 tragedy. Although startled, fearful, I still had to attend class on that day, but all of the class schedules were changed.
My psychology class changed the topic to the discussion of posttraumatic stress disorder, letting students freely talk about the event.
Facing the loss of so many lives, the discussion gradually went sentimental while someone started to express hatred towards the Muslims after watching an episode depicting celebrating Muslims after the tragedy from one local television station.
This evoked another feedback from a Muslim student, expressing grief, feeling sorry about the tragedy. Following that was other students’ support by telling that they watched another episode on television about the Muslims feeling sorry about the event.
Discussion went on and made no conclusion. Which episode represented the reality? Very possibly, both showed the true picture.
I know that reporting facts is the primary concern in news reporting, but I do know the pervasive power, the unconscious influence of the mass media.
The selection of reporting, the selection of facts, is so critical, especially during sensitive periods. Don’t the mass media know that what they are reporting can escalate the immediate emotional responses of the public? Don’t they know that their generalizations can provoke prejudice, anger and even conflicts among people?
Once I talked to a scholar from mainland China who was studying in the Department of Journalism. She said that she had to be very careful with U.S. journalists because they were always trying to pick out her remarks about dissatisfaction or criticism of the Chinese government, but that was not the whole picture of how she felt and thought. Again, selection and generalization were taking place.
I don’t want to commit the same mistake of making generalizations, saying that all reporters are doing it wrong. And I do agree that the public should be vigilant and remain cool-minded when getting information from the mass media.
Yet reporters, before doing the selection, please keep in mind that your reports can influence millions of people in the world, and then you will know what you should do.
Christine Chiu
The Chinese University of Hong Kong
