in "Blasting Music to Drown Out Reality", how did the author's diction betrays his bias?
Diction, of course, is simply an author's choice of words. The three words which are strong and meaningful in this phrase are blasting, drown, and reality. The writer chose those words deliberately to convey his feelings about both music and reality.
Music here is depicted more as noise than anything artful or beautiful. Here he blasts it--not plays it or uses it or in any way enjoys it--implying sheer sound. That idea is affirmed and continued with the word drown--not add to or help or enhance. "The music is played loudly," while technically the same idea, just doesn't carry the same weight or impact as what he wrote. This blasting music is so powerful--again, not beautiful or creative or amazing--that it can actually overwhelm, engulf, and drown reality. Music, then, has power.
It's open to some interpretation after that, I think. Perhaps the author loves the fact that blasting music can drown out reality; perhaps he is disdainful of those who hide from reality by blasting their music. This is where context may help.