Coverage holes and the perception of bias

These days the cry of “bias” is commonplace around news coverage. Excessive commentary and analysis contribute to this tendency.

However, it’s also because some outlets have leaned into the era of “fake news.” Combating this perception from some audiences requires thoughtful presentation of stories.

Watching the Derek Chauvin trial unfold across three nightly newscasts made for different viewing experiences. One divide in the coverage was how much bystander and courtroom footage each used. ABC stood out among the three for the heaviest use of courtroom footage. Early on, the network gave it significantly more time than CBS or NBC.

That allowed correspondent Alex Perez to use long clips of sometimes emotional testimony. Perez typically still provided solid, nuanced reporting. However, as the weeks dragged on and trial coverage shortened, the clips, seemingly, did not. Devoting so much time to testimony left holes in the reporting.

On April 14, Perez did not mention Morries Hall’s declining to testify, citing his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. Hall had been a passenger in Floyd’s car when police arrived. The ABC coverage focused on the testimony of Maryland’s former chief medical examiner, Dr. David Fowler. He claimed George Floyd may have suffered from carbon monoxide poisoning.

While this was worthy of focus, ignoring the Fifth Amendment plea of a passenger in George Floyd’s car at the time of his death seems questionable. The omission feels more significant when considering the defense’s argument included the possible influence of Floyd’s drug use. Notably, of the three networks, only NBC mentioned Hall’s declining to testify on April 14.

The following night, ABC ran a segment with the headline, “Chauvin Takes the Fifth,” Perez used an excessively long clip of Chauvin and his lawyer, Eric Nelson, explaining Chauvin’s decision not to testify. Missing entirely from Perez’s piece, however, was any mention of the day’s key drama. The prosecution attempted to insert last minute evidence that would have contained information about Floyd’s carbon monoxide levels.

Judge Peter Cahill declined to admit the new evidence, saying inserting it so late in the trial might prejudice the jury. The judge allowed Dr. Martin Tobin to return as a rebuttal witness after the defense’s presentation about potential carbon monoxide poisoning. He added, “If [Tobin] even hints that there are test results the jury has not heard about, it’s going to be a mistrial – pure and simple.”

In such a widely followed case, the judge’s mention of a possible mistrial is major news. That ABC did not mention this could raise questions about a bias toward the prosecution in this case. Whether or not that bias actually exists is almost irrelevant. In the “fake news” era, the suggestion of impropriety or unethical conduct, particularly when reporting on such an important story, is enough to tarnish a network’s coverage.