3 ms·
Oh I'm sure they are indeed actually biased, that's how bias works. They're not thinking: "this will better allow us to get away with presenting our political a
by jdoliner 9y ago
Oh I'm sure they are indeed actually biased, that's how bias works. They're not thinking: "this will better allow us to get away with presenting our political angle as objective truth" they're thinking "this will allow us to present the truth without being erroneously accused of bias by people who are actually biased themselves." I see no reason to believe that the writers of the times don't believe this. I do think it takes a certain cognitive dissonance, which The Times has mastered, to believe this view makes sense. To think critically is to be biased, and The Times certainly wants their writers to think critically, so the bias is unavoidable. I just wish they could be a bit more honest about it. But I understand why they can't.
- quadrangle 9y ago(although it was hard to parse your lack of quote-mark) You're right. It's possible (but far from certain) that the NYT folks believe themselves to be more objective than they are (or are capable of being). But a delusional belief in one's own objectivity and aiming to tamp down on public shows of bias is not the same as the implication in the comment I was replying to (which implied a self-awareness of bias that was being intentionally hidden publicly).