Biased news

Intended for constructive conversations. Exhibits of polarizing tribalism will be deleted.
Spartan_Warrior
Posts: 1680
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 1:24 am

Re: Biased news

Post by Spartan_Warrior » Mon Dec 19, 2016 7:56 am

lol @ Brute
George the original one wrote:I would bet most news outlets rarely report on any legislation.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/bill ... e-44275619

Hmm, well, the national legacy media is all over this state-wide New Jersey bill. Then again, it fits the legacy media narrative, AND they get to play the victim.

So can no one meet my challenge? I looked again today, strangely I still can't find any legacy media reporting on the censorship clause. I'm sure that's just because no Americans are interested, or it's just not that important, right? "If it were a real issue they'd be reporting on it", right? What about the other blatant, factually sourced examples of bias I've posted? Am I just too many Wheaton levels below everyone to understand? :|

Tyler9000
Posts: 1557
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 11:45 pm
Location: Austin, TX

Re: Biased news

Post by Tyler9000 » Mon Dec 19, 2016 12:42 pm

Spartan_Warrior wrote:What about the other blatant, factually sourced examples of bias I've posted? Am I just too many Wheaton levels below everyone to understand? :|
Nah -- I personally think media bias is so widespread that there's nothing really to argue. Your links are just the tip of the iceberg.

I'm not sure it counts as bias or simply fake news, but one of the more egregious examples of bad reporting was the time when Vox claimed Gaza and the West Bank are "connected only by a bridge that Israel limits traffic on." And then there's the time that the NYT included the phrase "fake but accurate" in the headline of an article about the Rathergate mess, which itself was a report by CBS News using forged documents that ultimately cost Rather his job.

The mainstream media has been a mess for a while now. Circling the wagons by attacking and limiting outside voices will only make it worse.

George the original one
Posts: 4754
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 3:28 am
Location: Wettest corner of Orygun

Re: Biased news

Post by George the original one » Mon Dec 19, 2016 2:11 pm

George the original one wrote:I would bet most news outlets rarely report on any legislation.
Some facts to back up my statement: 12,053 Congressional bills since Jan 6, 2015 (source: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/statistics)

So the news would have to report on an average of 16 bills per day. When was the last time you saw reporting on more than 3 bills in a week? Thus I stand by my original statement.

7Wannabe5
Posts: 5009
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Biased news

Post by 7Wannabe5 » Tue Dec 20, 2016 5:58 am

Stephens said the purpose of newspapers "changed to the political and polemical after 1765...

Daily publication began in the 1780s, just as the new American republic emerged. There were about 100 newspapers by 1790, many of them were spirited, and some were great annoyances to men in high positions. It was a time of enormous press freedom, a freedom exercised frequently in behalf of the Federalist or Republican parties, which subsidized their own publications. Humphrey said, "Many newspapers in the 1790s were intended to accept a particular political party." Two examples are the Gazette of the United States for the Hamiltonian Federalists; the National Gazette for the Jeffersonian Republicans. "Their editors believed that they should support their particular party in all that they did," she noted, "so they wrote essays in support of their party and included editorial comments in the news pieces that either supported their party or attacked the opposition."

Thomas Jefferson wrote in 1787 that "were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter." Samuel Adams said in 1768 that "there is nothing so fretting and vexatious, nothing so justly terrible to tyrants . . . as a free press."
Source: Colonial Williamsburg Foundation

IMO, the most important thing to realize is that when you are expressing concern about other people being duped or driven by information you believe to be biased or incorrect, you are de facto taking a paternalistic stance in relationship to other adults, and thereby acting in a manner in alignment with a preference to deprive "the poor fools" of their liberty. If your primary concern is that you will be duped or driven into behavior not in alignment with your self-interest by a piece of inaccurate or biased news, then you are de facto declaring yourself to be an infant incapable of making your own judgments and decisions without some "Daddy" (Walter Cronkite? Edward R. Murrow?) you can ultimately trust and rely upon. People blatantly lie? Attempt to convince others in alignment with their own self-interest? Take arguments into the realm beyond the rational in a moment of passion? Are sometimes too lazy to fact check? Santa Claus won't stuff my stocking no matter how good I was this year? Really????? :( :( :(

My 10th grade U.S. History teacher was a total old school hard-azz. 10th grade U.S. History is one of the classes all American kids are required to take at public schools so that they can theoretically become better citizens. So, when the barely functionally literate got-stoned-last-night kid who sat next to me fell asleep in class, our teacher would take a yard-stick and slam it on his desk to wake him up. When anybody complained, he would say "Life isn't fair, but it is equitable." Last week I was so fed up with a group of 6th graders whining and blame-shifting, as I was attempting to teach, I told them "I do not want to hear one more sentence that begins with "He, she or they. Next time you raise your hand, you better begin your sentence with the word 'I'" Hey kids, it's the age of the internet!!! Barrier to entry into the field of publication- ZERO!!! You don't like what the news sources are saying, then go out there and do your own investigation, come to your own conclusions, and speak your own piece.

End pickle barrel speech by grouchy old lady.

User avatar
jennypenny
Posts: 6248
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 2:20 pm
Location: Stepford USA

Re: Biased news

Post by jennypenny » Tue Dec 20, 2016 6:24 am

Well, yesterday was uneventful despite all of the hand-wringing over the last couple of weeks. Is anyone else a little disconcerted that the press got the story wrong again? I must have heard/read a dozen stories over the last couple of weeks, on top tier media no less, discussing the rules regarding delegates and what would happen if they switched votes or who the alternative candidate might be. They made it sound like it was a real possibility that Trump could lose the count. And yet yesterday was as boring as usual. How could they misread the situation again? The delegates aren't some silent majority who would refuse to talk to them, they're a small group of politically-oriented people.

I know the election is still an open wound for many, but the electoral college going against Trump was obviously a non-story. Think about how much time was devoted to it anyway in light of everything else going on in the world that could have (should have) gotten more coverage. This isn't about who you think should have gotten the vote or whether Trump is qualified. I'm just talking about the press doing their job. Why were they so wrong again? Were they hoping to convince delegates? Was it wishful thinking on their part? Were they playing to their left-leaning base? Are they making assumptions instead of doing the legwork involved in investigating a story? Are editors giving them time to do the legwork?

This really bothers me, and not because it's about Trump. How often do reporters talk about the 'mood' wrt whatever story they are covering, and now I wonder how often they are right. I get the feeling that there are a dozen or so reporters at Reuters and AP out gathering facts, half the time from local reporters, and then once that information hits the wire mainstream reporters craft stories around those meager facts without any additional reporting of their own.* Granted, they probably only have an hour or two to submit their story and assume changes can be made at any time, but old school reporters used to fact-check their stories before publication. And while they had longer lead times, they didn't have the internet or cell phones so 'legwork' was literally legwork.

I'm not saying it's a conspiracy or simple bias, although I'm sure that plays into it to varying degrees. It's probably a combination of factors including the fact that the media have become so insulated that they can't see when their reporting might be off or a story suspect. I heard a discussion on a POTUS radio show about fake news and the reporters on the show all admitted to getting duped at least once and sharing or retweeting fake stories. If reporters --professionals -- aren't doing any fact-checking before sharing stories, the media has a huge problem on its hands.


* How is that any different than what the gaggle of bloggers are doing on so-called fake news sites? MSM stories might sound more plausible, but that doesn't make them any more accurate. It only means they have a better chance of being accurate.

7Wannabe5
Posts: 5009
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Biased news

Post by 7Wannabe5 » Tue Dec 20, 2016 6:58 am

Because the age of professionalism is over, and we are now in the age of DIY with crap materials provided by others to make it easier. Home Depot = MSN.

Chad
Posts: 3863
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 3:10 pm

Re: Biased news

Post by Chad » Tue Dec 20, 2016 10:25 am

@JP

Yeah, I didn't even look for the decision yesterday. I thought it was interesting a few delegates were saying they weren't going to vote for Trump, but there was no way he wasn't getting the votes.

The media is just covering Trump right now because it's easy and it peaks the interest of most people. I have been as guilty as most for clicking on an article only to regret it.

Writing a story to either extreme is guaranteed a certain amount of clicks. Even the business channels are getting into it and they are usually better at not overly reporting on non-financial news.

Another big issue is all these reporters, news agencies, etc. are all still trying to find the appropriate business model for the new environments. This is resulting in more mistakes and bad judgement than normal. It's hard to tell when this will end or how it will end.

On a side note, the new daily 30 minute Vice News on HBO is really good. It usually does 3 in-depth stories in 20-30 minutes. All of them are directly from the reporter on the ground and with video of their interviews, events, etc. No anchor giving their "opinion." On the chart Jacob initially posted, it probably falls around the Atlantic in terms of overall rating. Shame it's on HBO, so I will be missing it until Game of Thrones is back on.

ffj
Posts: 1935
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2010 3:16 am

Re: Biased news

Post by ffj » Tue Dec 20, 2016 11:06 am

@7
" Last week I was so fed up with a group of 6th graders whining and blame-shifting, as I was attempting to teach, I told them "I do not want to hear one more sentence that begins with "He, she or they. Next time you raise your hand, you better begin your sentence with the word 'I'" Hey kids, it's the age of the internet!!! Barrier to entry into the field of publication- ZERO!!! You don't like what the news sources are saying, then go out there and do your own investigation, come to your own conclusions, and speak your own piece. "

Absolutely, and this is exactly what is happening in real life with alternative media quickly replacing the CNN's and Fox's of the world. Mainstream media is losing a long overdue battle to people willing to do investigative work and to report their findings honestly. It's refreshing to find those voices out there armed with their cheap microphones and webcams.

Riggerjack
Posts: 2651
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 3:09 am

Re: Biased news

Post by Riggerjack » Tue Dec 20, 2016 11:44 am

@spartan:
TITLE V--MATTERS RELATING TO FOREIGN COUNTRIES

(Sec. 501) This title establishes an executive branch interagency committee to counter active measures by the Russian Federation to exert covert influence over peoples and governments (with the role of the Russian Federation hidden or not acknowledged publicly) through front groups, covert broadcasting, media manipulation, disinformation or forgeries, funding agents of influence, incitement, offensive counterintelligence, assassinations, or terrorist acts. The committee shall expose falsehoods, agents of influence, corruption, human rights abuses, terrorism, and assassinations carried out by the security services or political elites of the Russian Federation or their proxies.

The committee must report annually on the steps it is taking to counter Russia's active covert influence measures.

Sounds fairly ominous. But this is an appropriations bill for the CIA, whose charter forbids operations on US soil. I would be much more worried if such wording applied to the NSA or DSH. I assume this has been part of the CIA's mission since the "red scare" of the 1920's. OK, OSS and SS, back then, but you see what I'm saying.

As we talk about bias news and Russian interference, I can't help but think back to the pro-Nazi press of the 30's, that did an about face when Germany and the USSR went to war. Russian influence in US news is nothing new, and I find it strange that we are talking about it as though it is news.

Riggerjack
Posts: 2651
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 3:09 am

Re: Biased news

Post by Riggerjack » Tue Dec 20, 2016 12:02 pm

IMO, the most important thing to realize is that when you are expressing concern about other people being duped or driven by information you believe to be biased or incorrect, you are de facto taking a paternalistic stance in relationship to other adults, and thereby acting in a manner in alignment with a preference to deprive "the poor fools" of their liberty. If your primary concern is that you will be duped or driven into behavior not in alignment with your self-interest by a piece of inaccurate or biased news, then you are de facto declaring yourself to be an infant incapable of making your own judgments and decisions without some "Daddy" (Walter Cronkite? Edward R. Murrow?) you can ultimately trust and rely upon. People blatantly lie? Attempt to convince others in alignment with their own self-interest? Take arguments into the realm beyond the rational in a moment of passion? Are sometimes too lazy to fact check? Santa Claus won't stuff my stocking no matter how good I was this year? Really????? :( :( :(
Absolutely!

I want spin, from all sides. I can make up my own mind, thank you.

And speaking of spin, and the revolution, I read a history of the revolution written by an English history professor. Wherein it was referred to as the War of American Succession. Interesting details come out. Like Samuel Adams being pre-Sicilian mafia, controlling longshoremen and Boston's docks. And he called for hanging pamphleteers who criticized him after the war. Oh, and he instigated the Boston Massacre, assaulting a squad of 6 men with a mob throwing bottles and chunks of ice.

Old histories, and histories written by the losers, tell entirely different stories. I have a US history schoolbook, that barely mentions slavery as a cause of our civil war. Slavery was just one of several economic reasons for the war. It also has some very unflattering things to say about American Natives.

All information put together by someone else has spin, whether news or history. I prefer they be blatant.

User avatar
Ego
Posts: 4214
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 12:42 am

Re: Biased news

Post by Ego » Tue Dec 20, 2016 12:45 pm

The mainstream media has always had disinformation, misinformation, and manipulation along with accurate reporting. Sometimes knowingly. Sometimes not. The amount of non-accurate reporting (or intentional failure to report) has always been limited by the self-correcting nature of media. The currency of the news business is reputation. Report something that is later shown to be false and the reporter/producer/organization suffers consequences and loses credibility.

Contrast that with the new media. They act as a megaphone for any and all perspectives, and then get to say I told you so when one of their hundred or so stories turns out to be correct. Everyone knows this and goes along for the ride.

The trouble is, people are losing the ability to distinguish one from the other because they both look the same on their screens.

Tyler9000
Posts: 1557
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 11:45 pm
Location: Austin, TX

Re: Biased news

Post by Tyler9000 » Tue Dec 20, 2016 1:47 pm

7Wannabe5 wrote:IMO, the most important thing to realize is that when you are expressing concern about other people being duped or driven by information you believe to be biased or incorrect, you are de facto taking a paternalistic stance in relationship to other adults, and thereby acting in a manner in alignment with a preference to deprive "the poor fools" of their liberty.
The line I've always liked about this idea is "The soft bigotry of low expectations."

subgard
Posts: 94
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 12:53 pm

Re: Biased news

Post by subgard » Tue Dec 20, 2016 3:41 pm

Our culture seems biased toward bias creation.
Children are asked "What's your favorite color?" Same with favorite food, favorite holidays, subjects in school, etc.
All absurd questions that demand a child create a firm bias where none need exist.
As they get older, it's demanded that they "have an opinion", mostly on subjects that they know too little about to form an opinion.
Not having a position on a subject is equated with being "uninformed", when usually, the opposite is true.
The news did not create those biases. Cultural pressure did. Probably long before the internet came around to profit from it.

If people were more agnostic about things they know little about, the confirmation-bias industry we call the news would not be nearly so profitable.

Does any one know if the internet has caused the Japanese to be hyper-partisan on everything? If the collectivist conformist Asian cultures have become just as polarized as us with the internet, it's a universal human phenomenon. If they haven't, it's probably our faux "individualism" that's done it.

JohnnyH
Posts: 2007
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 6:00 pm
Location: Rockies

Re: Biased news

Post by JohnnyH » Fri Dec 23, 2016 10:58 am

BRUTE wrote:in all fairness, while Ron Paul might not be Russian, he's most definitely a socialist.
Uh, should I be reading sarcasm? Ron Paul is about the furthest thing from a socialist.

fiby41
Posts: 976
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2015 8:09 am

Re: Biased news

Post by fiby41 » Sun Dec 25, 2016 9:45 am

All news is biased.

Only problem is finding news source that are biased as much as you are and that they are biased in the same direction.

Tyler9000
Posts: 1557
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 11:45 pm
Location: Austin, TX

Re: Biased news

Post by Tyler9000 » Wed Jan 04, 2017 8:11 pm

It looks like fake news has officially made its way to the Washington Post.

ffj
Posts: 1935
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2010 3:16 am

Re: Biased news

Post by ffj » Wed Jan 04, 2017 8:30 pm

@Tyler
We need to remind ourselves that the Washington Post broke the story of Russian hacking of our election. Assange has declared once again that the Russians were not part of the DNC leaks. Who is more trustworthy at this point?

George the original one
Posts: 4754
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 3:28 am
Location: Wettest corner of Orygun

Re: Biased news

Post by George the original one » Wed Jan 04, 2017 8:51 pm

Just because Assange knows where the publicly leaked emails came from doesn't mean the Russians aren't hacking.

But, yeah, Washington Post has some troubles. Is the lack of oversight intentional (considering who owns the Post) or not?

ffj
Posts: 1935
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2010 3:16 am

Re: Biased news

Post by ffj » Wed Jan 04, 2017 9:04 pm

@George
Yeah, who knows but I think its fair to require more proof than a Post story before we accept something as gospel. I also think its fair to require our government to present more proof before we believe everything they say. We can't just point to a newspaper story anymore.

User avatar
Ego
Posts: 4214
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 12:42 am

Re: Biased news

Post by Ego » Wed Jan 04, 2017 9:56 pm

ffj wrote:We can't just point to a newspaper story anymore.
Disbelief in the self-correcting nature of science seems to be correlated with disbelief in the self-correcting nature of journalism.

Why is that?

ETA: Sorry, that wasn't directed at you ffj.... It just occurred to me when I read your post. I know you are not an anti-science person.

Post Reply