Evaluating information ­ the argument
By Debbie Harris, Contributor

RECOGNISING AUTHOR BIAS

WHEN AN author is trying to persuade, whether it is a logical argument or an emotional appeal, he is obviously going to have a view that he or she is trying to express. However, you must realise that behind the author s stated opinion usually lie stated or unstated opinions, preferences, or positions that necessarily influence the ideas that are expressed, the way they are expressed, and the language used to express them. This is what is referred to as an author's bias an author's attitude or prejudice that influences his or her opinion on a subject.

For example, if you are reading an article on the opinion-editorial page of a newspaper written by an assistant commissioner of police about private sector funding for law enforcement, you would expect this person's comments to be biased. You would not be surprised if, because of his job, this person were to favour private sector efforts to support the police. His bias would certainly be in favour of support for the police in general and probably in favour of private sector support in particular. However, an article on the same topic written by a government senator who generally favours less private sector involvement in state and local issues would probably express a different opinion ­ a preference for government funding for police ­ undoubtedly reflecting a very different bias less private sector involvement in state and local issues.

Students, while being able to recognise an author's bias is definitely important in identifying attempts to persuade you of something and in deciding how seriously to take those efforts, remember that an author s bias can be either for or against something and not necessarily a negative thing.

Consider, for example, the following passage in terms of the author's bias concerning the issue of prayer in American public schools.

As a Christian, I quite agree that prayer is not harmful; indeed, my wife and I consider it essential, and want our children to grow up surrounded by it, and partly for that reason they attend a private religious school. But what the Supreme Court has recognised, and school-prayer advocates sometimes miss, is that the ideal of religious freedom means that the state should not express a view on how anyone should pray.

Steven L. Carter, Let us Pray.

In this passage from an article about prayer in American public schools, the author clearly expresses the Christian belief in the value of prayer. However, on the issue of public school prayer, the author just as clearly expresses opposition, apparently on constitutional grounds. Thus, the author seems biased in favour of private religious expression without interference of any kind or form the government, and this bias is in itself neither a positive nor a negative thing; it is merely a preference.

Closely related to the question of author's bias is the concept of tone. An author's tone may in some cases reflect his or her bias. Sometimes this tone is objective, meaning, that the writing shows no emotion, opinion, preference or bias. When an author writes objectively, he or she is not making any bias apparent. This, however, does not mean that the author has no bias; it simply means that he or she is not showing it. Occasionally, it may be possible to get hints of an author's bias when such things are considered as the author's background, if we are given any biographical information or the place the piece was published, if we know something about the philosophy of the publication s editors. Consider the following excerpt from the conclusion of an article published in the Native American Rights Fund Legal Review by an author who is described in an introduction to the article as an attorney representing the Catawba Tribe.

It is generally agreed that underlying all parties reluctance to support a fair settlement was the suspicion that the Tribe had no real leverage; that is, it could not win its case in court. But, for the Catawba Tribe there appeared to be few options. More than two centuries of relying on the good will and promises of the State and Federal Governments had resulted only in the loss of their ancestral lands and severe poverty among tribal members. It now appears that a just settlement is possible. And while the proposed settlement can never fully compensate the Tribe for the loss of its lands and economic self-sufficiency, it is hoped that the settlement will, as Chief Blue stated, provide the Tribe and its members with the tools to work with toward a brighter future.

Don B. Miller, Catawba Tribe vs. South Carolina: A History of Perseverance.

The efforts of the Catawbas to gain rights to land that they claimed was originally theirs is described by the author of this article.Despite his relatively objective language, since the author is a lawyer for the tribe and since the article appeared in a publication put out by an organisation working for Native American rights, it seems clear that the author is not only in favour of the settlement, but that he is also writing with an underlying bias in favour of the Catawba Tribe.

As you continue to evaluate the sources and the information you gathered for the Exposition section make every effort to recognise author biases where they are present.

Now let us see how well you did in responding to the practice questions given last week.

QUESTION 1(A)

The following errors might affect the reliability of Kishauna's research: the inappropriate design of the instrument and an unrepresentative sample.

QUESTION 1(B)

An inappropriate design of the research instrument will result in the collection of irrelevant data, and an unrepresentative sample will mean she cannot generalise about the TV preferences at her school, that is, it would result in an inaccurate analysis and interpretation of the findings.

QUESTION 2

Two considerations that Kishauna should bear in mind as she selects a sample for her study are the size of the sample (it must be wide enough) and it must be reflective of the population.

Congratulations are in order if you had the appropriate responses this week. Well done, you would have been awarded the maximum number of marks in the examination. Next Week we will look at some common errors in reasoning that we need to avoid. Until then, walk good!

Reference: Meagher, Don 1997 Handbook for Critical Reading, Harcourt Brace & Company, Florida, USA.