5 ms·
What evidence do you have that there is such a bias? Have you considered the possibility that the prevalence of bad news as you call it is indeed the truth? T
by yequalsx 9y ago
What evidence do you have that there is such a bias? Have you considered the possibility that the prevalence of bad news as you call it is indeed the truth? That the absence of good news might be because the positive effects are dwarfed by the negative?
- BurningFrog 9y agoLet me rephrase, and maybe you'll agree. If one million people in a city don't get murdered, and one does get murdered, whose fate will be reported as news? The murdered one of course. And the reporting will be truthful. But that doesn't mean most people get murdered.
- yequalsx 9y agoThis is not at all relevant to the discussion. The one getting murdered is newsworthy and noteworthy. The many that do not is not newsworthy. Rapidly increasing the temperature of the planet will have devastating consequences. Write news articles on its few benefits is not newsworthy in light of the impending devastation.
- BurningFrog 9y agoI note that now you're agreeing with yostrovs who originally asked "Why wouldn't a modest rise in temperature do some good in at least some ways?".
- yequalsx 9y agoI never disputed this or implied otherwise. It's quite clear from what I have written that I acknowledge there will be some benefits. It's equally clear from what I've written that the lack of articles on this is not indicative of politics or some other nefarious reason.