Opinion: The Missing Variable

Buckhannon, WV-December 5, 2025

When I was a child at the age of 9, I can remember watching the news so vividly; the year was 2001, and we lived in a post 9/11 world. I was young, I was afraid, I used to keep my brother up all night asking him ‘what if’ questions. Unfortunately, the news wasn’t much help for me, but we watched it anyway so that we could stay in the loop of what was going on. What I say from this point on is my interpretation, none of it is presented as factual: this is an opinion post, nothing more and nothing less.

I was never one to want to watch the News as a teenager, I hated the news, everyone I knew who watched the news or had anything to do with the news was either constantly depressed or angry. About the only time we would ever watch it was during election years. I’m not going to talk about if we leaned this way or that way at the time, because at this current time, as I write this article, I lean no way: I am completely, utterly, beyond the shadow of a doubt, 100% A-Political, I follow no party, I only follow the man Christ Jesus, in my current life.

 It wasn’t until I was older that I started to realize why I didn’t like watching the news, what made people so angry or depressed: it was all presented as bad news. In my time pursuing a Homeland Security Degree in American Public University, during one of the classes, they explained it sort of like this: you switch it to one channel, and the news is presented in this fashion,

 ‘These people are a threat, and they’re coming after me, and if they’re coming after me, then they’re coming after you.’ and if you switch it to the other channel you get the same thing, just the other side of it. Why do they do this? I will not speculate as to motives or why, nor will I place in ill-will or wrongdoing on anyone, station, or organization: I’ve truly always believed that people only ever try to do what they feel is right, and I can whole-heartedly relate to that.

 But I continued on, if I can’t watch the news, then surely I can read it, I thought; but I found that the words I read were constantly mixed with emotions and loaded language: language that seemed to always try to steer me in a certain direction, or make something seem a certain way. And this observation was carried out, by me, for a few years. Even today I will often go to a store, walk over to the news rack and pick up two newspapers that I know are leaning in a different direction in the aisle.

 In both papers are the same stories, but one puts it as ‘X is happening and it’s the end of the world,’ while the other says, ‘X is happening and it’s saving the world;’ then I would pick up a 3^rd, and it would say ‘X is happening and it may not be good.’ So, it occurred to me that even the most center of papers I would read would try to add a little something to the news. Again, I do not condemn or accuse anyone or any entity of wrongdoing, I’m just stating an observation of an ongoing pattern that I was observing.

 I ended up taking a communications class in my 3^rd year at APU and after learning how, I soon found myself researching the events for myself, and I would constantly be surprised that there was truth in everything all of them were reporting. But it was sprinkled with a little extra something, it seemed, nobody was reporting just the facts: only the straight facts as they were written in the firsthand sourcing Why? Is It because it’s boring? Is it because viewership would go down? Why? I still can’t answer that question as I write this; I also was directed towards an online site named “Media Bias/Factcheck.’ You can go to this site, type in the name of a source, and it will tell you which side of the isle they fall on, left, right, center, or somewhere just left or right of center. This started to paint a picture for me as to why, just why, some of the reporting was the way that it was.

   So, I came to a conclusion a little over a year ago: I wasn’t raised to sit back and complain about a problem, I was raised that, in America, if you have a problem with something, go do something about it and try to be part of the solution.

Am I implying that the way news is reported by the majority of outlets is a problem? Not at all, not in the slightest, but what I am saying was a problem is that I couldn’t find the missing variable in the equation. I couldn’t find the missing variable that stayed true center; I couldn’t find (no matter how hard I tried) that source, that outlet that only presented the news or said

 ‘here it is, this is what firsthand sourcing (what we in Appalachia call ‘the horse’s mouth) says and nothing can be added or taken away from that until it’s literally added or taken away.

 Where I come from, we were always taught that, if the person didn’t say it themselves, and you can’t find out if they said it elsewhere for sure, then what you were hearing to the contrary was a lie and was to be treated as such until you could, with 100% surety, confirm that it wasn’t.

 Again, I’m not accusing anyone, entity, organization or elsewise of lying, just putting forth my upbringing.

So, I came to the conclusion last year that if I couldn’t find the variable, then that was a problem, and in America if you find a problem that needs fixing: you become the solution, you fix it. Again, not saying any news outlet was or is a problem, I’m saying the missing variable in the equation was a problem, and that’s one of the many reasons why I decided to start Appalachian Post.

We here at the Post make it our sworn duty to take journalism and reporting back to the way it used to be when our parents and great grandparents, and especially our great great grandparents enjoyed it. Our motto here at Appalachian Post is ‘Here’s the news as confirmed by First-Hand sources: you decide how you want to feel about it: it’s not our job to tell you how to feel or to let our personal emotions leak onto the page. Even in this post, though it is an opinion and I can take certain liberties if I would so choose, I have constantly tried my hardest to present my story as completely neutral as humanly possible.

 At the end of the day, we don’t want to compete with anyone, we’re not here to cast blame, we’re not here to accuse, we’re not trying to change the world of reporting and journalism: we just want to be that missing variable in the world of journalism: no emotion, no loaded language, no interpretations, no bias (political or otherwise), just, here is the news and these are the facts: nothing more, nothing less.

The Appalachian Post Opinion section exists to provide thoughtful, honest, and personal perspectives on the issues that affect our communities. While news articles present only verifiable facts, our opinion pieces allow writers to speak from experience, conviction, and emotion, always with integrity and respect. We do not use our opinion platform to attack individuals, groups, or other outlets. Instead, we focus on ideas, values, and the human impact behind the stories we cover. All opinions published by the Appalachian Post remain grounded in truth, clarity, and compassion, avoiding sensationalism and distortion. Our goal is to give readers a space where real voices can be heard, difficult topics can be explored, and the weight of life’s moments can be shared with honesty and understanding.