Abortion is “the deliberate termination of a human pregnancy, most often performed during the first 28 weeks of pregnancy.” Abortion began to spark controversy when the United States began implementing abortion laws in the 1820s, more specifically after the Roe V. Wade case. Abortion laws initially stated that women could not have an abortion after four months of pregnancy and have changed. The Roe V. Wade case took place in 1973, when the U.S. Supreme Court addressed “the question of the constitutionality of law criminalizing or restricting access to abortion.” The court ruled in favor of the Fourteenth Amendment and said that women have the right to have an abortion, but there are states that may say otherwise. States essentially want to protect human life and women's health. Initially, the case was resolved by having states regulate abortion in the third trimester of pregnancy. Subsequently, in a different case, the justice system rejected the quarterly framework. At one point, abortion was considered illegal. Abortion is one of the most discussed topics in the United States and is surrounded by many prejudices. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay Media bias occurs when journalists, tabloids, or news producers select stories or events to cover and how they interpret them. Fox News and The New York Times are two tabloids that provide information to the public but also have biases associated with them. The United States must implement a way to eliminate bias in the media because it affects people in a negative way and only serves subjective stories, leaving out valuable information. In a survey conducted by the Pew Research Center, they state that “Fox News was the primary source for 40% of [Republican] voters during the 2016 election” and “when it comes to choosing a media source… conservatives lean heavily around Fox News." This means that conservative, right-wing individuals tend to favor this source for viewing political or world topics. Meanwhile, The New York Times is seen as more liberal. The Pew Research Center also conducted an investigation into this source and found that “the New York Times audience is consistently liberal, and since the 1960s the New York Times has supported only Democratic presidential candidates.” Both Fox News and The New York Times can be seen to serve some sort of bias while informing the public about information. Nowadays, social media and news networks have had a huge impact/influence on individuals. News organizations such as CNN, the New York Times, Fox New, and the Washington Post provide political and economic information to the public. Some media outlets provide information based on their following, Democrat or Republican, and how they show/expose information can have an influential impact. Bias by omission occurs when the media strongly supports one political party over the other and fails to provide information, leaving out the other party's opinions. For example, the New York Times writes stories based on its liberal fan base. In Will the Supreme Court Overturn Roe V. Wade After All?, the article discusses the possibility of Roe V. Wade being overturned. The article only discusses the situation regarding Justice Anthony M. Kennedy and his retirement, possibly overruling the Roe V. Wade case. The article never states what would happen if the case is dismissed. There is no discussion of how “Louisiana, Mississippi, North and South Dakota” would ban abortion if the case is overturned. The New YorkTimes did this so that people who lived in those states or states where people would like abortion to be banned could not be informed of how close they are to passing this law. They also failed to discuss the possibility that Trump is violating women's rights by imposing this rule. Similarly, Fox News published Abortion, Roe v. Wade at center of Supreme Court nominee debate: What could happen to the Basic Law? This article places extraordinary focus on Judge Brett Kavanaugh rather than the topic itself. Fox News fails to discuss why this decision could be beneficial to the Conservative Party or how it could be harmful to the Liberal Party. Most abortion information found in the media is one-sided, meaning that the tabloid or publisher has a certain view on the topic that is discreetly implemented in their information. When reading about the Roe V. Wade case, most information leaves out both the conservative and liberal sides to get their point across. They want to seem like their answer is the only right one, and somehow ignore the other political view. Another way tabloids create bias is through labeling. When reading an article or watching a video, Americans can become very fixated on labels and people's perceptions can change. In the New York Times article, Louise Melling states: “More recently, Chief Justice Roberts chastised President Trump for attacking a judge as 'Judge Obama,' declaring that there are no Obama judges or Trump judges, but judges only." President Trump actually wrote back to Chief Roberts and said “I'm sorry… but you actually have Obama judges.” By labeling the judges “Obama judges,” Donald Trump is claiming that since Obama appointed the judges, they will influence whatever he believes/wants. This is very problematic because it indicates that “Obama judges” will only vote on Democratic opinions and ignore conservative opinions, vice versa. This makes people worry because someone in power claims that there is a bias within the judges and that those judges should be impartial. Similarly, Fox News claims that pro-choice people are “acting like their own god” and calls them “murderers.” Saying that women can't "act like their own god" can have negative effects. That phrase can make a person feel like they hold a position of power because they are essentially comparing them to God. If individuals choose to have an abortion, it is up to them to feel bad about themselves because they hold the power of the fetus's life in their hands. Not to mention, the word murder has a negative connotation associated with it. This not only implies that the woman killed an individual, but that she herself killed the person. In this case, this is not true and the word association is driving individuals away from being pro-choice due to the negative association of the words. The negative association of words happens with both groups, so it is not deployed. Aside from omission and labeling, there is also bias due to story selection. This includes when reporters use individuals to support their cause. Furthermore, when it "include[s] more sources that support one view over another." This is very similar to prejudice by omission because it only tries to justify their political opinions. In the Fox News article there are subsections that include the opinions of the public. Fox interviewed Aziza Ahmed, a law professor at Northwestern University School,specialized in abortion and health law. Professor Ahmed argues that if the Roe V. Wade case were overturned there would be “more laws restricting abortion [and they] would pass and be deemed constitutional” and has also indicated that abortion would be made illegal if the case were overturned . Fox News only includes information that will enhance the conservative side rather than also including liberal opinions, making Fox News more credible. Instead, the New York Times article serves as a platform to see “judges' biases.” President Trump only nominated Brett Kavanaugh to help him overturn the vote on the case. They claim that “President Trump promised to appoint judges who would overturn Roe V. Wade,” meaning the president will do everything he can to overturn the cases. This helps their case because Trump-appointed judges will automatically vote in his favor. The New York Times also wrote: “The question now is not what the Supreme Court's soothsayers will tell us, but whether Chief Justice Roberts and his conservative colleagues will defend the integrity of the Court or use their new majority to maintain the Trump's promise." This statement basically means that Justice will either vote impartially or give Trump what he wanted. The New York Times is only using this information to improve its case based on the judges' biases, not the case itself. When it comes to credible facts/sources it is very difficult to find them. Many sites have bias implemented within them and people don't even notice. Fact checking is very important because it allows readers to see whether the information they are getting is true or false. People need to educate themselves with adequate and unbiased information so that they can have an unbiased view on the topics. The Sources After All, Will the Supreme Court Overturn Roe V. Wade? and Abortion, Roe v. Wade at the center of the debate on Supreme Court candidates: what could happen to this fundamental law? both had slightly truthful information. For example, it is true that Trump wanted to appoint a judge who would vote the way Trump wants the law to pass. Also, another truth is that people use very harsh negative language with word associations regarding pro-choice people. Not to mention the fact that there were lies in the articles. When the outlet claims that judges vote based on who elected them, that's a lie because most judges remain neutral and tend to vote on how they think it will help society/people. They vote based on what people want and need. Please note: this is just an example. Get a custom paper from our expert writers now. Get a Custom Essay Abortion is a controversial topic that makes it difficult to find unbiased information. News outlets like Infowars, Fox News, and The Blaze tend to have more conservative views, while Palmer Report, The Huffington Post, and The New York Times have more liberal views. If an individual wants to educate themselves on a certain political topic, they should use unbiased sources such as ABC News or TIME because such sources do not “have a preferred [political party], or an opinion that would influence [individuals'] judgment.” The 1973 U.S. Supreme Court case Roe V. Wade is crucial when discussing the “constitutional right to access safe and legal abortion.” Some people were shocked when they learned that Americans supported the Supreme Court ruling and today about 27% of people living in the United States do not want to see the case overturned simply because Americans believe that individuals have the right,.