3 ms·
Hold on. The NYT just admitted bias recently regarding their reporting on the election, and an opinion piece talks about 'Liberal Intolerance' in the NYT, but n
by eggy 10y ago
Hold on. The NYT just admitted bias recently regarding their reporting on the election, and an opinion piece talks about 'Liberal Intolerance' in the NYT, but now FB is almost as culpable due to false stories? I still think there is a higher signal-to-noise ratio when there are many people able to debunk a piece on FB or other social media, than when a hardcopy, accepted as trusted source such as the NYT once was, posts a story.
The fly-over states were discounted by most media, and people are still reeling from the election results they can't believe. People raise the popular vote in political conversations, not realizing that almost all of Hillary's popular vote differential came from NY and CA, again urban coastal vs. the fly-over states. People are in denial about what other Americans aside from them felt about all of this.
I predicted a Trump victory in July and September publicly on Twitter, and I am no fan of Trump, or Hillary for that matter. People laughed at me. I was born and raised in a working-class neighborhood in Brooklyn, so it came from purely talking to other Americans in my travels in the US and overseas, and I am no journalist tasked to go out and get the Five Ws [1].
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Ws https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Ws
- spiderfarmer 10y agoThe fact that a lot of media didn't think Trump would win is unrelated to the fact that fake news is damaging to democracy. Just like fake science is damaging to scientists. Fake scientific articles are read, quoted and shared through the scientific community and it can take a long time to weed out. How many people still believe Obama is a muslim because they read it (repeatedly) on Facebook? I'm guessing millions.
- wav-part 10y agoThe "curated news" is not a solution, its a bigger problem. When you request top 10 voted posts thats what you get. Not the truth. If voters believe 1 like = 1 truth, then you have identified the problem with democracy that have always existed. > Just like fake science is damaging to scientists. Fake scientific articles are read, quoted and shared through the scientific community and it can take a long time to weed out. No its not. Scientist = Sceptic.
- eggy 10y agoFB is only a platform for social media, not the source of news stories, so I found it irking they were calling FB to task on this. The NYT claims to be a news journal, a source of news, and then openly admits bias. Fact-checking seems to be in question too. Maybe not fake news, but wishful news at best.
- wakkaflokka 10y agoI think the purported liberal slant of the mainstream media is a separate (though related) issue from the blatantly-false news stories that come from both sides of the aisle, that permeate through social media platforms.