4 ms·

Are the facts more important or are the topics? For example, the NYT is generally pretty factual however IMO the topics they select and placement in the period

Are the facts more important or are the topics? For example, the NYT is generally pretty factual however IMO the topics they select and placement in the periodical are the message. So the fact that they write front page article on some terrorist attack in say France that kills 5 while a similar drone strike on the same day in Afganistan kills 20 and gets buried on page 30 is the point. Who was is that once said the first casualty in any war is truth? And how many blows did we miss that lead to that first casualty? Regardless, I see little downside to this and hope it's successful!

agumonkey 9y ago
"We know exactly everything about nothing that matters" 2017
abyssin 9y ago
This is the root question. The discussion around fake news often touches the subject of press neutrality. Some will say mainstream press is biased and has an agenda, so-called mainstream will answer by proposing more fact-checking. However, truth and neutrality are situated in different dimensions. It seems to be relatively easy to avoid spreading lies for those who want to. Providing neutral news is an entirely different type of problem. Addressing the critics made to the press by promising fact-checked news might be perceived as only one more manifestation of unjust discretionary power of the press to determine what can be said. Is striving for neutrality something the press should do? Or should it work on clarifying how biased it is, and why?
- ruleabidinguser 9y ago
  Its easy to use real facts to lie. This is IMO the MSM approach to fake news.
- _jal 9y ago
  The first thing to do is get the press to admit bias. Bias is fine. Everyone is biased. Journalism in other countries works fine with admission of opinions. Just own your own viewpoints and quit pretending to be some neutral third party. The important thing is to take the fiction off the table. "Of course we sound like marginally liberal establishment-supporters - we're the NYT." "Naturally we support the revanchists - we're Fox." (See? My bias is up front.)
- mtdewcmu 9y ago
  >> Some will say mainstream press is biased and has an agenda The people that say that are generally conservatives (or a subset of conservatives). Liberals generally don't complain about the mainstream media being biased. I'm just pointing out that the idea of the mainstream press being biased and having an agenda is itself biased and has an agenda. >> so-called mainstream will answer by proposing more fact-checking. Fact checking is supposed to be automatic. When a mainstream news outlet gets caught reporting false information, it's a big embarrassment. The NY Times had the Jayson Blair incident a few years ago and it really stung. The Times also apologized for over-hyping the Iraq War[1]. >> Is striving for neutrality something the press should do? Or should it work on clarifying how biased it is, and why? High quality news outlets already strive to do both. "Honest news" isn't a new idea; it has always been a part of journalistic ethics. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/26/world/from-the-editors-the-times-and-iraq.html https://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/26/world/from-the-editors-th...
  - adamrezich 9y ago
    >The people that say that are generally conservatives (or a subset of conservatives). Liberals generally don't complain about the mainstream media being biased. http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/04/25/media-bubble-real-journalism-jobs-east-coast-215048 http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/04/25/media-bubb...
cooper12 9y ago
One thing Jimbo said in the Wired interview he did is that since the site will be crowdsourced, the donors will be able to decide what the journalists cover. So more niche topics might get covered this way if there is demand (the example he gave was "dog breeding").
- xienze 9y ago
  Yeah if that's the case I'm guessing 100% of the donations are going to go towards shitting on Trump.
  - sebastos 9y ago
    I wouldn't be so sure. Talk is cheap. Once you select for people who are willing to make a donation, I bet you'll end up with a fair share of actual grown-ups who want to talk about real news.
nabla9 9y ago
I'd argue relative importance facts are more important than topics. Incorrect facts is more fundamental form of bias and topic bias is higher level. Getting facts wrong constantly is either incompetent journalism or malevolent behavior. Selecting topics with bias but reporting them accurately creates value for everyone and the bias is rarely malevolent in mainstream media. It just reflects and enforces the world view of the writers and readers.

agumonkey 9y ago

"We know exactly everything about nothing that matters" 2017

abyssin 9y ago

This is the root question. The discussion around fake news often touches the subject of press neutrality. Some will say mainstream press is biased and has an agenda, so-called mainstream will answer by proposing more fact-checking. However, truth and neutrality are situated in different dimensions. It seems to be relatively easy to avoid spreading lies for those who want to. Providing neutral news is an entirely different type of problem. Addressing the critics made to the press by promising fact-checked news might be perceived as only one more manifestation of unjust discretionary power of the press to determine what can be said. Is striving for neutrality something the press should do? Or should it work on clarifying how biased it is, and why?

ruleabidinguser 9y ago
Its easy to use real facts to lie. This is IMO the MSM approach to fake news.
_jal 9y ago
The first thing to do is get the press to admit bias. Bias is fine. Everyone is biased. Journalism in other countries works fine with admission of opinions. Just own your own viewpoints and quit pretending to be some neutral third party. The important thing is to take the fiction off the table. "Of course we sound like marginally liberal establishment-supporters - we're the NYT." "Naturally we support the revanchists - we're Fox." (See? My bias is up front.)
mtdewcmu 9y ago
>> Some will say mainstream press is biased and has an agenda The people that say that are generally conservatives (or a subset of conservatives). Liberals generally don't complain about the mainstream media being biased. I'm just pointing out that the idea of the mainstream press being biased and having an agenda is itself biased and has an agenda. >> so-called mainstream will answer by proposing more fact-checking. Fact checking is supposed to be automatic. When a mainstream news outlet gets caught reporting false information, it's a big embarrassment. The NY Times had the Jayson Blair incident a few years ago and it really stung. The Times also apologized for over-hyping the Iraq War[1]. >> Is striving for neutrality something the press should do? Or should it work on clarifying how biased it is, and why? High quality news outlets already strive to do both. "Honest news" isn't a new idea; it has always been a part of journalistic ethics. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/26/world/from-the-editors-the-times-and-iraq.html https://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/26/world/from-the-editors-th...
- adamrezich 9y ago
  >The people that say that are generally conservatives (or a subset of conservatives). Liberals generally don't complain about the mainstream media being biased. http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/04/25/media-bubble-real-journalism-jobs-east-coast-215048 http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/04/25/media-bubb...

cooper12 9y ago

One thing Jimbo said in the Wired interview he did is that since the site will be crowdsourced, the donors will be able to decide what the journalists cover. So more niche topics might get covered this way if there is demand (the example he gave was "dog breeding").

xienze 9y ago
Yeah if that's the case I'm guessing 100% of the donations are going to go towards shitting on Trump.
- sebastos 9y ago
  I wouldn't be so sure. Talk is cheap. Once you select for people who are willing to make a donation, I bet you'll end up with a fair share of actual grown-ups who want to talk about real news.

nabla9 9y ago

I'd argue relative importance facts are more important than topics. Incorrect facts is more fundamental form of bias and topic bias is higher level. Getting facts wrong constantly is either incompetent journalism or malevolent behavior. Selecting topics with bias but reporting them accurately creates value for everyone and the bias is rarely malevolent in mainstream media. It just reflects and enforces the world view of the writers and readers.