SHELTON GUNARATNE: American press shows massive 'First World' bias

MOORHEAD -- The insular American press has ignored the forthcoming Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM), scheduled to be held in Sri Lanka from Nov. 15-17.

Dr. Shelton Gunaratne

MOORHEAD -- The insular American press has ignored the forthcoming Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM), scheduled to be held in Sri Lanka from Nov. 15-17.

It comprises 53 independent countries (with a total population of 2.25 billion occupying almost one-third of the world's land area) that once were British colonies.

This omission reflects a serious flaw in the news judgment of the American media establishment and the journalists who filter the news that's "fit to print."

Before I substantiate this thesis, let me introduce some basic facts about CHOGM to let the reader assess the magnitude of the flaw.

The origin of CHOGM was in the First Colonial Conference of 1887. The subsequent periodic meetings were identified as Imperial Conferences from 1907 onwards.


With the end of colonialism, the countries realized the need to adopt new terminology that reflected the changed international political structure. Thus, the 17 top-level meetings held from 1944 to 1969 were called British Commonwealth Prime Ministers' Conferences.

But this label did not adequately describe the new phase of the Commonwealth, in which Britain relinquished its leadership role to be a coequal with other member nations, which assumed diverse political structures headed by presidents, prime ministers, monarchs and military chiefs.

So, the term Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting solved the problem.

Although the biennial CHOGM has gathered 22 times since 1971, only a small fraction of Americans knows anything about it because the elite press of the country -- such as the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post and USA Today -- as well as the non-elite press such as the Herald and The Forum have failed to report on any of the CHOGM meetings. If you think I am exaggerating, do a Google search.

Now, here are the arguments that support my thesis:

First, by failing to cover CHOGM, journalists ignore all the news values they learn in textbooks and journalism schools (i.e., impact/ importance, timeliness, prominence, proximity, conflict, currency and necessity).

The American media establishment seems to believe that these news values apply only to the reporting of the Western and the affluent world. They appear to think that reporting on the conflict over human rights in Sri Lanka, the Canadian prime minister's decision to boycott the conference over this issue and the immense pressure of Tamil Nadu on the Indian prime minister also not to attend would not benefit but merely bore the American media consumer.

Second, the American media establishment conscientiously underestimates the impact of international organizations that are dominated by developing nations without the guiding presence of the United States, which they believe to be primus inter pares (first among equals) of the world.


The inclusion of Australia, Britain, Canada and New Zealand does not make much of a difference.

Third, the American media establishment does not see any resemblance between its colonial experiences under British hegemony and those of the developing countries under the same hegemonists. They think Britain was instrumental in "civilizing" the barbarians of Asia, Africa and the Americas, whereas the Europeans who immigrated to America were superior to the imperial British.

Therefore, the reporting of CHOGM and the grievances of the participating "natives" would not benefit the American media consumer.

Fourth, the American media establishment is very good at preaching media ethics, freedom and responsibility while breaching these principles unabashedly in every day practice.

Its biases in reporting the Middle East conflicts, its failure to give voice to all points of view, its reversal to sensationalism at the expense of social responsibility, its allegiance to capitalism and vastly unequal wealth distribution and its refusal to view poor countries as the victims of exploitation by the manipulative financial capitalists are some of the many reasons for the omission of reporting CHOGM-related processes and events.

Last but not least, the American press seems to have put the responsibility of reporting foreign news to the American public on the Internet. But it has to ask itself how the American media consumer could sort out what to read from the plethora of news output spewed out by their smart phones and desktops without the initial orientation to news selection by their local or national rags.

Gunaratne is a professor of mass communication emeritus at Minnesota State University-Moorhead.

What To Read Next