When can you tell if your view of an issue is the correct one, or if it is wrong, or if it is biased and wrong? I don’t know, not for sure.
When Malaysian Airlines flight 370 went missing months ago, citizens and pundits marvelled at how constant the news streams on that still-unsolved mystery were. “Breaking news” lost all currency. Practically anyone who could spell airplane speculated on one news show or another. If the incident wasn’t so tragic, we could look back on that period with a smile. There were so few other dramas brewing on the world stage that one held the media and the world transfixed. Now we’re back to reality with lots of dramas from the Ukraine to the Gaza Strip to Syria to West Africa and many other places.
Rather than inflame passions on major issues or tragedies, let’s consider a non-lethal matter at the recent FIFA World Cup, albeit no stranger to disproportionate feelings of tragedy. During the Italy – Uruguay game, the latter team’s superstar striker, Luis Suarez, allegedly bit the shoulder of an Italian player. No penalty was called but FIFA soon after suspended Suarez for the remainder of the World Cup plus a four month ban from any soccer, barring a successful appeal.
Those who condemned Suarez pointed to two previous incidents when Suarez was suspended for biting opponents. In one, Suarez is on video opening wide before clamping onto a Chelsea defender’s arm. If there was a clear cut case for suspension, complete with a guilty history, wasn’t this it? Well, that may have depended on what country you supported or which one you are from.
John Dayton of the Daily Mail (UK) reported that hundreds of fans in Uruguay provided a de-facto hero’s welcome to Suarez, including the country’s president. Perhaps a few thousand others were reportedly moved to nearby location for satellite cheering. As with so many issues, members of the public lined up on both sides, although far fewer in the media or the sport, outside of Uruguay, took Suarez’s side. Even with a sporting decision well covered on video, reviewed by adjudicators, and widely discussed, what some saw as a clearly bad act others saw as something else. Some even suggested a conspiracy. Even among those who believed Suarez was guilty some saw his punishment as excessive, including the Italian player who was apparently bit.
With passions so high and reasoning so apparently low on this matter, what hope can we have for unbiased discussion between warring factions in other places, or clear thinking in nations fighting, say, an Ebola outbreak? Fortunately, I know people from Uruguay who openly joked about the Suarez matter with me when my favourite team lost in the semi-final. “At least your guys didn’t bite anyone”, one friend texted me within minutes. So, there may be hope with bigger issues too. Which brings me to one of my potential biases.
Despite my decidedly Scottish surname, which was my mother’s maiden name, my father was born and raised in Rotterdam so I have cheered for Netherlands football since childhood. I’ll cheer for Scotland and Canada when they make it to the World Cup. I enjoy watching the Oranje play and I get unreasonably tense when they are in trouble on the pitch. It’s just a game and it makes little sense but there you go.
When our star forward Arjen Robben went down in the penalty area in the dying moments of a tied game, and Netherlands scored on the ensuing penalty kick to advance past Mexico, people were either elated or upset, in the latter case not just by the result. Many Mexico fans and lots of neutral folks saw Robben’s fall as a dive that should have itself been penalized. Many Netherlands fans and other neutral folks saw a foul even while acknowledging some salesmanship on Robben’s part in response to the contact. Robben soon after admitted to diving in an earlier play in that game but said the key penalty was truly a foul.
When I was asked if it was a foul or a dive, by many friends, I responded yes. Did I stop cheering for Netherlands after they advanced on the controversial call? No way! What is perhaps more curious is that I don’t speak Dutch, I’ve not yet visited the Netherlands, my Dutch relatives in Canada aren’t much for soccer, and I wasn’t primarily raised by my father. Still, I feel my Oranje passion in my bones. That could certainly give me bias, at least for the Netherlands football team, and make me far from correct on my opinions concerning that team.
On more tangible matters of import, such as the deadly dramas playing out across the globe, I have opinions too. I feel confident I am correct because I do my best to get the straight goods from the media and other sources. Moreover, I know few people affected by most of these global dramas. Nevertheless, am I correct or am I biased despite my best efforts?
Perhaps being on the lookout for our own biases, and allowing some biases out within fairly harmless circumstances like sporting events, is a good start. But I don’t know, not for sure.