Is CNN being Islamophobic?

[ttalloo]

I sent this story from The Guardian on the top 10 baby names in the UK, which told the story in a pretty factual way, to my American relatives yesterday (baby on the way, hence the interest), www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/oct/27/oliver-top-boys-name-jack,

and got this back from them today, wondering how the same story could be told so differently
www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/europe/10/28/uk.mohammed/

I'm really shocked by the spin and inaccuracy in the CNN story, all the more so because I've always thought that CNN of all the US news networks is usually the most reliable in its reporting. The whole tone of the article seems to be suggesting that Muslims are taking over the UK and Europe, and despite the reassuring words of the imam at the end, we all have something to worry about.

It seems so very casually Islamophobic.

This showed up in the daily mail too

It could only be true if Muslim women were having quintuplets and naming them all Mohammed

Pretty unlikely I reckon

Comparing the left-wing Guardian's coverage to Ted Turner's CNN's on any given subject is always going to be like comparing chalk and cheese. The Guardian dismisses the popularity of Mohammed (all spellings combined) in a sentence and we're left with a pretty bland and boring piece on baby names as a result. CNN... bearing in mind the recent anti-islamic stories in the US such as the Koran-burning stunt and the campaign for/against the Ground Zero Islamic centre... takes the same information and extrapolates the more interesting fact for its readers.

I think calling it 'islamophobia' is your own interpretation.

CNN has always been extremely skewed - watch any coverage of the palestine situation and it is abundantly clear where they lie.

it's factual reporting - can't see the problem at all.

"It could only be true if Muslim women were having quintuplets and naming"

Yes it is "true", the statistics don't lie, but they can however be manipulated.

The study that CNN and the DM have picked up on merges all the spellings of Mohammed into one and doesn't, I believe, merge the mixed spellings of any other name. Is it therefore any wonder that suddenly that name comes up top?

"it's factual reporting - can't see the problem at all."

Well it's factual by the skin of it's teeth, it's been manipulated and skewed. And that they picked on that one name alone to merge together indicates that the people presenting the survey had a clear goal in mind. And that is the "problem", they had the point they wanted to make already decided upon and bent the figures to make it happen.

Basically you're being blatantly manipulated by someone, is that a "problem"?

I agree, chil1234 that comparing The Guardian with CNN is as productive as comparing it to the Mail, but the fact is that CNN have picked up one aspect of this story, skewed the facts around it to fit their agenda, and run with it. The Guardian has just reported the facts, without emphasising a particular angle.

I looked up the Mail's article on this story, and it was as biased as CNN's.

The difference in reporting between The Guardian, and the Mail and CNN just underlines the importance of impartiality in the media - and how easily readers' views are being manipulated.

You could equally argue that the Guardian has downplayed a fairly reasonable observation in order to fit their own particular agenda. Bias can be exhibited in what isn't said as much as in what is said. That's why it's important to get news & facts from multiple sources.

"Bias can be exhibited in what isn't said as much as in what is said. That's why it's important to get news & facts from multiple sources."

I agree that you need to get the news from multiple sources.

However the facts are that the Guardian didn't merge any names.

The Mail and CNN chose to merge only one name and that name happened to be an Islamic one.

So which is less biased?

If the Mail and CNN had consistently merged all the common spellings of a name together then it would be possible to argue that they were being even handed.

It's as if some Journalist saw the list, didn't like what they saw, did some number crunching based on their premise that Mohammed should be higher and bent the list into that shape.

Not good.

CNN is not a right wing organisation. In fact, usually, it's accused of liberal bias.

How has the story been twisted?

Jon
John
Jonn
Mark
Johnne

...which is the most popular name on that list? It's John. It doesn't matter that they're all spelt different ways - they are all pronounced the same way - therefore the most popular name is clearly John.

The most popular name for newborn baby boys in the UK is currently Mohammed - spelt in various ways.

I don't think reporting the fact is offensive. I don't think commenting on the shift that's led to this is offensive.

Yes, the CNN report including comments from a member of the public that didn't like it - but it also included somebody that wasn't bothered.

"...which is the most popular name on that list? It's John. It doesn't matter that they're all spelt different ways - they are all pronounced the same way - therefore the most popular name is clearly John. '

There are two ways of doing this.

1. Combine names which are the "same" into one, this is what you did.
2. Count all names separately, this is what the survey originally did.

Taking either option 1 or option 2 would be fine. But that's not what's happened here.

After the survey chose to take option 2, deciding that it does matter how names are spelt, CNN and the Mail then got there hands on the results and for some reason decided to merge the spellings of Mohammed, and only Mohammed together.

They didn't merge Jon and John as you would and they didn't merge any other names. Just that one.

"How has the story been twisted?"

Well that's how, by picking different methods of counting names depending on what the name was. You're no longer comparing "like with like" which has got to be the point of any top 10.

Imagine a car safety survey that counted the accidents for every model of car but then for some reason added all the BMW results together while leaving every other model as a separate figure..

Wouldn't you think "hang on, why have you done that, that kind of break the survey".

It's the office of national statistics - they simply released the list as they do every year. they didn't put any twist on it.

the results were reported eveywhere: BBC, ITN, associated press, radio 4 - and yes, the Daily Mail and CNN.

The ONS didn't look at the various spellings of Mohammed and make the conclusions - the media did. And why not? It's interesting - it's news...

If you take the various spellings of Lily that is, in fact, the top girls name - and this was reported to.

However it's not as interesting as the mohammed story

"The ONS didn't look at the various spellings of Mohammed and make the conclusions - the media did. And why not? It's interesting -"

It's interesting that they would quite openly admit to bending and massaging the figures for one very particular name,

It's interesting that they don't understand, or think that we're too stupid to understand, that you can't really compare a number of things that have been counted in different ways.

It's interesting that they didn't publish a list where all the similar names were merged. It was only worth doing the work for that one very particular name.

It's interesting that they obviously poured over those figures searching for some ways of making a headline out of it. The Guardian considered that it's readers would want to know what the most popular name was and had that as the headline, the Mail and CNN thought that that wasn't the sort of thing their readers would want to read more about.

It's interesting that they didn't just take the Guardian's approach and point out in the story what happens if you merge various names together.

It's interesting what these stories says about how the media work when it comes to presenting us with "facts" and figures.

I read the Mail a lot because it usually goes against my normal opinion of a story and it's good to be made to think outside of the box. However this story was a real moment of head slapping stupidity.

The Guardian's report is complete bollocks and makes no sense whatsoever - as is often the case with them.

They haven't bent or massaged the figures - they are official figures issued by the government.

Nancy you're right clearly, merging all the various spellings of Mohammad and none of the other names is completely balanced and unbiased reporting....Mohammad's are obviously taking over the world....

I actually know a few men by that name who arent remotely mozlem btw, the spellings vary...and the guys arent mozlem.

Most Muslim boys I know of are incresingly called Adam.

what are the different spellings of Mohammed?

Using Olis as a variation of Oliver seems to be stretching it.

But, apart from Lily, there were no other names spelt in different ways that add up to anything significant.

The Guardian's examples were ludicrous - Jack and John are two totally different names. As are Harry and Henry.

The stats are based on registered names - so if the kid is registered as Jack then that's his name - not John.

To repeat: totally accurate reporting based on totally factual evidence.

think it's just so bizarre to try and make out the media - all of them - have it in for Muslims because they reported the fact that a lot of English and Welsh kids are called Mohammed.

"They haven't bent or massaged the figures - they are official figures issued by the government."

The official figures count all the different spellings of every name separately.

The DM and CNN publication of those figures count all the different spellings of every name separately except for Mohammed.

The DM then even lead with it's fiddled chart of top 10 names right near the top of the story and put the result of it's fiddling, "Mohammed" being the most popular, as a headline.

"To repeat: totally accurate reporting based on totally factual evidence. "

Well yes it's factual and yes it's accurate but it's a great example of how you can be accurate yet twist and spin the truth in such a way as to make some point. It also makes an utter nonsense of trying to compare the popularity of names, which was meant to be the whole point of the story.

Either separate all the spellings or merge them all together. That's a fairly normal and sensible approach, you know, compare apples to apples and all that.

To do it for one name only makes it look very dodgy and very silly.

Nancy66, actually Jack is a diminutive of John, and Harry is a diminutive of Henry, so they are as much the same name as Ollie and Oliver or Alfie and Alfred. It therefore makes sense to count all the Jacks and Johns together, and is not skewing the figures at all.

The Guardian reported that if all the Olivers and other derivatives of the name were added together, Oliver would still be a more popular name than Mohammed; CNN and the Mail just picked on the fact that if all 12 spellings of Mohammed are counted together it's the most popular boys' name in the country, which it isn't.

The bias is therefore in CNN and the Mail taking one fact that suits their world view and printing it to wind up their readers into thinking that Muslims are taking over the country. This manipulation of the facts promotes hostility and fear, and is Islamphobic in my view.