4 ms·

I see many people here who have said it, and I will say it; I haven't watched any mainstream news(Fox, CNN, ABC, etc) in years. All it is, is negativity and dec

I see many people here who have said it, and I will say it; I haven't watched any mainstream news(Fox, CNN, ABC, etc) in years. All it is, is negativity and deception. For the most part, I don't care about what is going on. I get my fill of major events from browsing reddit and HN, and even then I just read the comments, rarely the article. I've never used FB as a source of information, that sounds about as bad of a source as you can get. Back when I used to watch the news, it was always the same. Something like >> Weather >> Death >> Death >> Shooting >> Crime reports >> Crime reports >> Sports >> Empty feel good story(Guy saves kitten, guy donates to charity, etc) >> Ending They focus so much on negativity and toxic behaviors, it's depressing. I don't want to wake up in the mornings and first thing I see is how many people died the previous day from local crimes. Even worse are the minor crimes where people who might not even be guilty get their picture blown up on screen and automatically deemed criminals prior to being convicted. "Man who might have stolen a car is charged, no evidence has yet been presented. So here is his picture, links to his social media accounts, his address, his entire life story. If you ever see him in the future, consider him a criminal" It's so hard to get unbiased information anymore. Every major news outlet leans towards one side or the other. The stations that do try an report unbiased get their funding cut and put in financial ruin.

0x445442 9y ago
Yes... In general I think we're all too concerned about things WAY beyond our spheres of influence. My wife, though she's gotten better, tends to get too emotionally invested in situations abroad. I try to explain to her that I'm not dispassionate but that I realize we live in an imperfect world where bad things are happening all the time and just because people on TV or wherever are bringing it to her attention doesn't mean it's any worse than a similar situation happening some place else that she's not hearing about. The problem is when folks hear about all these negative events they tend to want government to tinker until we reach a utopia where nothing bad happens anymore. The tough question though; how do we create/maintain an optimally informed electorate?
ch4s3 9y ago
> It's so hard to get unbiased information anymore. I'm not so sure that "unbiased information" is a thing that really exists. For example, you would like to know the outside temperature, so you check online. That information comes from a sensor somewhere near where you happen to be. But who placed the sensor there, and why was that location chosen? Was the sensor calibrated? How was it originally designed? What choices were made in the design process, and how did the engineer's biases shape the final product. You could keep going. Obviously, that's a bit absurd, but it's relevant to news. Even a simple reporting of facts about a car crash can be view through numerous lenses. Initial fact gathering by police and emergency workers all add their own perspectives and inputs to the "raw data", and then that has to go through a reporter who is also a person with their own world view, opinions, and experiences. Do they use the word "crash", or "accident"? Both words heavily bias the reporting of a car coming into contact with a guardrail at a particular speed. It would be hard to strip all bias from something so simple. For murkier issues, like the actions of nation states, it is even harder to"stick to the facts". The facts may not even be clear. The data you include in a report has to be curated somehow, and that can't be free from bias. You have to select sources, and again those are decisions made by people. Unbiased information is in my opinion a myth invented largely to discredit the idea that reporting is useful even with bias and that there can exist objective facts. Perhaps there is a problem of propaganda masquerading as news, or heavily biased reporting pretending to be wholly objective, but that's a different thing. Ultimately it's our responsibility as consumers of information to look at the information presented to us with a critical eye.

0x445442 9y ago

Yes... In general I think we're all too concerned about things WAY beyond our spheres of influence. My wife, though she's gotten better, tends to get too emotionally invested in situations abroad. I try to explain to her that I'm not dispassionate but that I realize we live in an imperfect world where bad things are happening all the time and just because people on TV or wherever are bringing it to her attention doesn't mean it's any worse than a similar situation happening some place else that she's not hearing about. The problem is when folks hear about all these negative events they tend to want government to tinker until we reach a utopia where nothing bad happens anymore. The tough question though; how do we create/maintain an optimally informed electorate?

ch4s3 9y ago

> It's so hard to get unbiased information anymore. I'm not so sure that "unbiased information" is a thing that really exists. For example, you would like to know the outside temperature, so you check online. That information comes from a sensor somewhere near where you happen to be. But who placed the sensor there, and why was that location chosen? Was the sensor calibrated? How was it originally designed? What choices were made in the design process, and how did the engineer's biases shape the final product. You could keep going. Obviously, that's a bit absurd, but it's relevant to news. Even a simple reporting of facts about a car crash can be view through numerous lenses. Initial fact gathering by police and emergency workers all add their own perspectives and inputs to the "raw data", and then that has to go through a reporter who is also a person with their own world view, opinions, and experiences. Do they use the word "crash", or "accident"? Both words heavily bias the reporting of a car coming into contact with a guardrail at a particular speed. It would be hard to strip all bias from something so simple. For murkier issues, like the actions of nation states, it is even harder to"stick to the facts". The facts may not even be clear. The data you include in a report has to be curated somehow, and that can't be free from bias. You have to select sources, and again those are decisions made by people. Unbiased information is in my opinion a myth invented largely to discredit the idea that reporting is useful even with bias and that there can exist objective facts. Perhaps there is a problem of propaganda masquerading as news, or heavily biased reporting pretending to be wholly objective, but that's a different thing. Ultimately it's our responsibility as consumers of information to look at the information presented to us with a critical eye.