4 ms·

You're repeating the false narrative that unbiased news does not exist. There are lots of unbiased news outlets who just report on stories as they come in. I l

by vinhboy 10y ago

You're repeating the false narrative that unbiased news does not exist. There are lots of unbiased news outlets who just report on stories as they come in. I learn about all sorts of government corruption and waste from NPR, NYTimes, WaPO, etc... And relating to current events, I also learn about all the unscrupulous things Clinton did from these sources. I don't need to be inundated with right-wing propaganda be unbiased. Just as I wouldn't spend too much time reading HuffPo or ThinkProgress. No one news source is complete, or 100% correct, but not every news source is credible or deserve our attention.

wyager 10y ago
> NPR, NYTimes, WaPO Not directed at you specifically, but if you think those sources are unbiased, it just means that you're bad at detecting bias. Edit: Haha, this one struck a chord.
- Natsu 10y ago
  WaPo is one of those doing some fairly shady things, in fact: https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/2699 https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/2699 http://heavy.com/news/2016/07/wikileaks-emails-clinton-bernie-list-directory-photos-most-damaging-worst-rhode-island-delegate-fec-jvf/3/ http://heavy.com/news/2016/07/wikileaks-emails-clinton-berni... I'm still waiting for them to do a story on their own involvement here....
- jsmthrowaway 10y ago
  Name an unbiased publication from your perspective.
  - wyager 10y ago
    > Name an unbiased publication from your perspective. https://arxiv.org/archive/math https://arxiv.org/archive/math If you mean a news publication, I can't, because they don't exist. We can maybe go for less biased, but that's a much more complicated question. Sorted by minimal bias, I'd probably just start linking to other arxiv URLs.
    - jsmthrowaway 10y ago
      Edit: The comment this one responded to has been basically rewritten, so my reply is no longer appropriate and I cannot delete it.
      - wyager 10y ago
        I was disagreeing with the OP's assertion that NPR, NYTimes, and WaPO are unbiased. I'm not sure what you expected.
- vinhboy 10y ago
  I am completely ok with you directing that comment at me, because I fundamentally disagree with your assessment. I have a pretty complete understanding of current events from reading those sources. For your statement to be valid, you'd have to prove that there is a considerable amount of information missing and is only available via conservative media.
  - wyager 10y ago
    > being covered by conservative media. Where the hell did I say that conservative media was unbiased?
  - shard972 10y ago
    > For your statement to be valid, you'd have to prove that there is a considerable amount of information missing and is only available via conservative media. That is not the standard for bias, and the fact you make your standard "Well if it doesn't have info that conservatives have". What about libertarians? Anarchists? Socialists? Fascists? Communists? Everyone is bias, some places do a great job of separating out their biases from reporting but its fantasy land to think that there are motivated journalists out there that just don't have an opinion one way or the other.
  - hueving 10y ago
    >For your statement to be valid, you'd have to prove that there is a considerable amount of information missing and is only available via conservative media. No, information may have been made available by biased media, but it may have been presented in such a way to adjust the perceived significance of it. Take the email scandal for example. Every news outlet provided the information, but there are vastly different conclusions about the importance of it that a reader will be led to draw based on how the information was presented. Even the headline you were upset about was a logical conclusion given a viewpoint based on the information available about the recent shooting of the police officers. Information: Two policeman killed by a man who was in the country illegally Conservative news interpretation: Illegal immigrant a result of poor border control policies by current administration. Therefore, "Obama lets immigrants across border to kill white people." Liberal news interpretation: Immigration is a touchy subject right now, exclude anything related to it. Therefore, "Two policeman were killed by a person who happened to be a human."

by vinhboy 10y ago

wyager 10y ago

> NPR, NYTimes, WaPO Not directed at you specifically, but if you think those sources are unbiased, it just means that you're bad at detecting bias. Edit: Haha, this one struck a chord.

Natsu 10y ago
WaPo is one of those doing some fairly shady things, in fact: https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/2699 https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/2699 http://heavy.com/news/2016/07/wikileaks-emails-clinton-bernie-list-directory-photos-most-damaging-worst-rhode-island-delegate-fec-jvf/3/ http://heavy.com/news/2016/07/wikileaks-emails-clinton-berni... I'm still waiting for them to do a story on their own involvement here....
jsmthrowaway 10y ago
Name an unbiased publication from your perspective.
- wyager 10y ago
  > Name an unbiased publication from your perspective. https://arxiv.org/archive/math https://arxiv.org/archive/math If you mean a news publication, I can't, because they don't exist. We can maybe go for less biased, but that's a much more complicated question. Sorted by minimal bias, I'd probably just start linking to other arxiv URLs.
  - jsmthrowaway 10y ago
    Edit: The comment this one responded to has been basically rewritten, so my reply is no longer appropriate and I cannot delete it.
    - wyager 10y ago
      I was disagreeing with the OP's assertion that NPR, NYTimes, and WaPO are unbiased. I'm not sure what you expected.
vinhboy 10y ago
I am completely ok with you directing that comment at me, because I fundamentally disagree with your assessment. I have a pretty complete understanding of current events from reading those sources. For your statement to be valid, you'd have to prove that there is a considerable amount of information missing and is only available via conservative media.
- wyager 10y ago
  > being covered by conservative media. Where the hell did I say that conservative media was unbiased?
- shard972 10y ago
  > For your statement to be valid, you'd have to prove that there is a considerable amount of information missing and is only available via conservative media. That is not the standard for bias, and the fact you make your standard "Well if it doesn't have info that conservatives have". What about libertarians? Anarchists? Socialists? Fascists? Communists? Everyone is bias, some places do a great job of separating out their biases from reporting but its fantasy land to think that there are motivated journalists out there that just don't have an opinion one way or the other.
- hueving 10y ago
  >For your statement to be valid, you'd have to prove that there is a considerable amount of information missing and is only available via conservative media. No, information may have been made available by biased media, but it may have been presented in such a way to adjust the perceived significance of it. Take the email scandal for example. Every news outlet provided the information, but there are vastly different conclusions about the importance of it that a reader will be led to draw based on how the information was presented. Even the headline you were upset about was a logical conclusion given a viewpoint based on the information available about the recent shooting of the police officers. Information: Two policeman killed by a man who was in the country illegally Conservative news interpretation: Illegal immigrant a result of poor border control policies by current administration. Therefore, "Obama lets immigrants across border to kill white people." Liberal news interpretation: Immigration is a touchy subject right now, exclude anything related to it. Therefore, "Two policeman were killed by a person who happened to be a human."