By Renee Hobbs, Ed.D.

Founder, Media Education Lab

Professor, School of Communications and Theater

Will the 2008 election be fair? We don’t know yet. Stories of cheaters stuffing ballot boxes, tampering with voter machines, and manipulating registration lists and absentee ballots are practically a tradition every four years. But voters need to watch out for how language can shape our perception of reality without us being aware of it, especially on the topics of “fraud” and “suppression.”

The voter fraud issue has intensified as the election draws near. But the topic is so controversial that there is a polarization of perspectives on the issue. Neutral information just isn’t easy to find. Republicans want stricter voter identification provisions and believe that citizen organizing groups like ACORN are encouraging non-citizens to vote. Democrats think that Republicans want to intimidate African-Americans, Hispanics and poorer voters to discourage them from voting. And there are many other strong opinions, too. Nearly everything you will read, see or watch on this topic will have a point of view in one way or the other.

People’s opinions shape their understanding of reality – and this affects both what we read and what we write. In the next few days, put on your critical thinking glasses before you read a newspaper, listen to talk radio, watch TV news, or go to Google, Yahoo, or any search engine. When it comes to the topic of voter fraud or suppression, ask: Who created this message? How are language and image used to shape the meaning? What’s the point of view? What is left out?

When exploring a political topic online, it’s important to remember that search terms can have a bias. All of these terms will lead you to polarized information about this topic: “voter fraud, voter ID, voter suppression, and voter disenfranchisement.” Take the entry on “voter suppression” on Wikipedia. The accuracy and neutrality of the facts in the entry are disputed and this is clearly labeled when you visit the site.

Because it does not rely on traditional sources of authority, Wikipedia reminds us that we must actively judge the authority of information for ourselves. Every Wikipedia entry has a discussion page where both writers and readers can share their ideas about the validity and credibility of specific facts in each entry. And since anyone can contribute, you can see people sorting, analyzing and evaluating information as they share information and ideas.

Even though some people are critical of it, Wikipedia can be a good place to begin to explore an unfamiliar topic. It’s created by volunteers who share information freely and it’s a place where you can see clearly how point of view shapes the construction of knowledge.

People need to keep their critical thinking glasses firmly in place so that they can identify how point of view is present in all forms of communication. On almost every issue in this election, there is a lively debate going on about the bias and balance of facts and information. Even messages that might seem non-controversial always have a point of view. Recognizing this helps us to become active media consumers and to make informed decisions about the messages we encounter.