කෙහෙළියට එරෙහි විශ්වාසභංගය විවාදයට ගැනීම පමා වීම: වරද කාගේද​?

Ethics Eye

dc.contributor.author	Ethics Eye
dc.date.accessioned	2025-04-03T16:09:42Z
dc.date.available	2025-04-03T16:09:42Z
dc.date.issued	2023-08-10
dc.identifier.uri	https://archive.veriteresearch.org/handle/456/7326
dc.description	This entry includes a write-up and an infographic (both in Sinhala).	en_US
dc.description.abstract	On 9th August 2023, Sinhala newspapers reported on the delay of the no-confidence motion debate against Keheliya Rambukwella. Dinamina and Aruna emphasised that Sajith Premadasa was responsible for the delay in their headlines. In contrast, Lankadeepa and Mawbima highlighted that it was his party, Samagi Jana Balawegaya, rather than Premadasa personally, that was responsible. This variation in reporting illustrates how media outlets can use their platforms to shape narratives according to their own interests, reflecting the role of editorial bias in influencing public perception.	en_US
dc.language.iso	si	en_US
dc.publisher	Colombo: Verité Research	en_US
dc.relation.ispartofseries	Ethics Eye;
dc.subject	Media ethics violation	en_US
dc.subject	Unethical reporting - Problematic reporting	en_US
dc.subject	Unethical reporting - Different framings of news	en_US
dc.subject	Unethical reporting - Bias reporting	en_US
dc.subject	Imbalanced reporting	en_US
dc.title	කෙහෙළියට එරෙහි විශ්වාසභංගය විවාදයට ගැනීම පමා වීම: වරද කාගේද?	en_US
dc.type	Infographics	en_US