Date: Mon, 3 Apr 1995 16:09:00 PST
Subject: Media watch:RKBA hearings

         Media Bias???
         
              Anyone with access to the newsgroups should check out 
         the two wire service versions of the RKBA hearings on 
         "clari.news.guns".  Reuters and AP each have an entry and it 
         is enlightening.  For those of you who don't have access to 
         the newsgroups here is a summary of the accounts of the 
         hearing in which two of the three panels were pro-gun, and 
         the meetings were chaired by pro-gunners.
         
              Reuters opens with two objective paragraphs explaining 
         the hearings and background.  The first quote  used in the 
         article is pro-gun, followed by an anti-gunner.  Covers three 
         of the pro-gun witnesses, ends with two of the anti-gun 
         witnesses.  Total make-up of story:54 lines, 26 identifiably 
         pro-gun, 16 identifiably anti-gun, 14 other.
         
              Associated Press opens with four paragraphs from 
         anti-gunners, beginning with the story of the woman whose 
         hubby and son committed suicide.  The article ends with the 
         story of the mother of one of the Long Island Massacre 
         victims.  One pro-gun witness is quoted, one pro-gun 
         Congressman is quoted, both in the middle of the text.
         Total make-up of story: 60 lines total, 15 identifiably 
         pro-gun, 33 identifiably anti-gun, 12 other.
         
              These two articles give totally different impressions 
         from each other of what really happened.  Unfortunately, 80% 
         of the papers in this country use AP and almost nobody uses 
         Reuters.  Who does your paper use?