3 ms·
Good catch regarding the biased/unbiased. Parent to that post pointed out that there is a news source that tries to show unbiased news. I was implying that we n
by harigov 10y ago
Good catch regarding the biased/unbiased. Parent to that post pointed out that there is a news source that tries to show unbiased news. I was implying that we need to take such news sources to people, rather than expecting them to get to that on their own. As I mentioned elsewhere, the idea is not to show unbiased news but rather show other side of the news (in the bias spectrum). I am not entirely clear on what makes the most sense, which is why I posted it here.
I don't have any claims on people not agreeing with me. I have claims on me not understanding what's going on. I think if such a tool as I proposed existed, I would be happy to use it.
- htwillie 10y agoThe best "tool" available is the No Agenda Podcast. Hosts Adam and John present national and global issues as portrayed by mass media, and systematically DECONSTRUCT the stories. They not only highlight biases, but explore propagandistic elements and discuss how the media intentionally affects the consumers. Most importantly, they work to identify the MOTIVATIONS for medias' biases in the first place, and demonstrate for their listeners how to be much more critical, skeptical, and analytical in the way they consume the news. Listen to a few episodes and you might rethink the need for building a tool at all.
- jquip 10y agoIn all aspects, they would be brilliant, but what about spectrum of content coverage. What about readership? But this dissemination of information by identifying biases of the entities involved is a tactic that can be used by anyone. Objective thinking belongs to everyone, doesn't it?