3 ms·

I don't think this is only Facebook's fault. I watched several extremely biased Youtube videos on both sides. I guess it's just how decentralized media works;

I don't think this is only Facebook's fault. I watched several extremely biased Youtube videos on both sides. I guess it's just how decentralized media works; it only tells people what they want to hear. Not so long ago, the media used to be relatively trustworthy, now everything has become propaganda. It started online mostly but now even major TV channels and newspapers which used to pride themselves on journalistic integrity have become propaganda machines. There is no truth in the media anymore; the only way to approximate the truth is by watching opposing media channels and then 'averaging them out' in your mind. All the news I was reading online was so obviously biased in Hillary's favor that I was compelled to watch Fox news (which I used to think was complete garbage) just to try to get the other side of the argument.

miles7 10y ago
This assumes Fox is as biased in one direction as, say, NPR is in the other. But you can tell the quality of reporting from the content itself and the way it is presented. For example, while cable news channels will go to the same non-expert pundits for every story, NPR will actually call a different specific expert who is knowledgable to comment on each story.
- jondubois 10y ago
  Sure, that's something you have to account for as well (they're not equally biased). That said, you'd be surprised how well media organizations can bend hard facts (and so-called 'experts') to match their opinions. People who've worked in quantitative market research will tell you that you can find pretty much any pattern you want in any data if you present it (and label it) carefully. Just because they've put in extra work to get an 'expert' and did some research doesn't mean that they're unbiased; it just gives you extra confidence - But you still have to fact-check yourself.
daenz 10y ago
> There is no truth in the media anymore; the only way to approximate the truth is by watching opposing media channels and then 'averaging them out' in your mind. Nailed it. I force myself to deliberately read viewpoints I disagree with, to listen to what they're saying, to hear what is important to them. Sometimes I see their points, sometimes I don't, but I always learn something new. It's really quite shocking and scary how many people aren't even familiar with the arguments of "the other side." The only know "their side's" caricature of the other side, which is simply not enough.

miles7 10y ago

This assumes Fox is as biased in one direction as, say, NPR is in the other. But you can tell the quality of reporting from the content itself and the way it is presented. For example, while cable news channels will go to the same non-expert pundits for every story, NPR will actually call a different specific expert who is knowledgable to comment on each story.

jondubois 10y ago
Sure, that's something you have to account for as well (they're not equally biased). That said, you'd be surprised how well media organizations can bend hard facts (and so-called 'experts') to match their opinions. People who've worked in quantitative market research will tell you that you can find pretty much any pattern you want in any data if you present it (and label it) carefully. Just because they've put in extra work to get an 'expert' and did some research doesn't mean that they're unbiased; it just gives you extra confidence - But you still have to fact-check yourself.

daenz 10y ago

> There is no truth in the media anymore; the only way to approximate the truth is by watching opposing media channels and then 'averaging them out' in your mind. Nailed it. I force myself to deliberately read viewpoints I disagree with, to listen to what they're saying, to hear what is important to them. Sometimes I see their points, sometimes I don't, but I always learn something new. It's really quite shocking and scary how many people aren't even familiar with the arguments of "the other side." The only know "their side's" caricature of the other side, which is simply not enough.