3 ms·
Only insofar as a lot of 'news' reporting is really opinion in disguise. The who/what/when/where of the story shouldn't be changing and only the fact that so m
by Natsu 9y ago
Only insofar as a lot of 'news' reporting is really opinion in disguise. The who/what/when/where of the story shouldn't be changing and only the fact that so many organizations fail to link to, e.g., official court rulings when they discuss a decision, or to full video of political proceedings they quote from, allows for that kind of variance.
Think of Groklaw vs. normal legal coverage for example. One gave you every court document & context. The other brings on some random expert to give a few words and then starts printing reactions of random people on Twitter or whatever.
- devoply 9y agoMotivated reasoning guarantees that rationality is always colored with opinion and bias. Like look at the flat earth society for an ridiculous example of this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motivated_reasoning https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motivated_reasoning
- Natsu 9y agoThat will change how people interpret facts, yes. But it can't really change whether, e.g., a court ruled for or against someone in a case.
- devoply 9y agoWell yes that's true. But you don't have to agree with what the court ruled, I was not trying to argue against your point... but in the real world many things in the real world are not about interpreting an agreed upon authorities decisions otherwise you are in that paradigm. Like for instance in this case you are a person operating in the paradigm of the law.
- Natsu 9y agoI guess we have different ideas of what 'news' is, then. To me, 'news' consists only of the objective facts and 'opinion' covers all the rest of the analysis. I normally care only about the 'news' portion and I look for links, video, etc. to verify those facts. The 'opinion' side of the stories is generally not of interest to me.