4 ms·

I would first ask: how are they being biased? Could you give examples?

by johneth 10y ago

pearjuice 10y ago
Wikileaks has published a massive email archive (Podesta Emails) of her wrongdoings which she kept private. She even admitted to having "a public position and a private position on policy". Basically, lying to her audience and pledging to "back room deals". Her private email server debacle et cetera. Media reporting on any of this is very mild. All media outlets seem to co-operate against Trump with coordinated headlines. There are many examples, notably: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CtTFPUaW8AER8Qn.jpg https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CtTFPUaW8AER8Qn.jpg https://theintercept.com/2016/02/25/tv-pundits-praise-hillary-clinton-on-air-fail-to-disclose-financial-ties-to-her-campaign https://theintercept.com/2016/02/25/tv-pundits-praise-hillar... AJ+ is constantly running pro-Hillary and anti-Trump videos which get massively promoted by Facebook's algorithms. Just ready any news item on Hillary/Trump on any respectable media outlet and you will 9/10 times read a negative undertone for Trump and a positive one for Hillary. It's overly biased and nobody seems to really bother. Again, this is not about being in favor of Trump or Hillary, just how the media has clearly already picked sides and is obviously creating a positive imago for one candidate to the public opinion which is often based on mainstream media.
- lgieron 10y ago
  I think the media are almost always owned and ran by people who either heavily believe that one set of values (and hence, one side of the debate) is right, or are just plain corrupt. I suspect it's because a common motivation for creating a media outlet is wanting to voice your beliefs about how the world should look like (instead of just doing honest reporting/ unbiased debate). Ufortunately, these kinds of media are also far bigger success commercially, because people in general want to read stuff that confirms their worldview (it's easier than reading an unbiased newspaper that shows that their beliefs might be wrong and the world is indeed super complicated). My reaction to this is to stop consuming media. I only try out new titles to see if they are trying to be unbiased.

I would first ask: how are they being biased? Could you give examples?

by johneth 10y ago

I would first ask: how are they being biased? Could you give examples?

Wikileaks has published a massive email archive (Podesta Emails) of her wrongdoings which she kept private. She even admitted to having "a public position and a private position on policy". Basically, lying to her audience and pledging to "back room deals". Her private email server debacle et cetera. Media reporting on any of this is very mild. All media outlets seem to co-operate against Trump with coordinated headlines. There are many examples, notably: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CtTFPUaW8AER8Qn.jpg https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CtTFPUaW8AER8Qn.jpg https://theintercept.com/2016/02/25/tv-pundits-praise-hillary-clinton-on-air-fail-to-disclose-financial-ties-to-her-campaign https://theintercept.com/2016/02/25/tv-pundits-praise-hillar... AJ+ is constantly running pro-Hillary and anti-Trump videos which get massively promoted by Facebook's algorithms. Just ready any news item on Hillary/Trump on any respectable media outlet and you will 9/10 times read a negative undertone for Trump and a positive one for Hillary. It's overly biased and nobody seems to really bother. Again, this is not about being in favor of Trump or Hillary, just how the media has clearly already picked sides and is obviously creating a positive imago for one candidate to the public opinion which is often based on mainstream media.

lgieron 10y ago
I think the media are almost always owned and ran by people who either heavily believe that one set of values (and hence, one side of the debate) is right, or are just plain corrupt. I suspect it's because a common motivation for creating a media outlet is wanting to voice your beliefs about how the world should look like (instead of just doing honest reporting/ unbiased debate). Ufortunately, these kinds of media are also far bigger success commercially, because people in general want to read stuff that confirms their worldview (it's easier than reading an unbiased newspaper that shows that their beliefs might be wrong and the world is indeed super complicated). My reaction to this is to stop consuming media. I only try out new titles to see if they are trying to be unbiased.