3 ms·

Reuters also has a history of bad reporting wrt Japan, at least as far as I'm concerned. They often translate things incorrectly and lead with conclusions base

Reuters also has a history of bad reporting wrt Japan, at least as far as I'm concerned. They often translate things incorrectly and lead with conclusions based on that mistranslation. They are not the only ones on my "usually biased news" list, though. The Japan Times often picks up stories from the Yomiuri Shinbun, which are questionable in nature and translates them. These are then often picked up by the BBC. What I find interesting, though, is that I don't think it is necessarily editing bias. I think it's actually the opposite: poor editing. What I've found is that when I've found stories that are mistranslated, or which contain seemingly intentionally misleading information, it's actually the same reporters. It is really only a handful of reporters that seem to be responsible for all of the crap news stories. The problem is that the editors seem to let the stories through (possibly because they are money makers???). I'm not going to name names (of reporters) because my "analysis" is really adhoc and probably also biased. However, I encourage people to look at the by-lines and see if you find any patterns with types of stories and their authors. Don't assume that because it's reported by a reputable news service that the information is correct and unbiased.

w1nt3rmu4e 8y ago
I've seen some truly awful journalism from Reuters. Articles that were so agenda driven as to almost laughably gloss over facts in order to present the desired narrative. (Laughable if reputations and money weren't on the line.) I've called some of the offending journalists out on social media, which I encourage everyone to do.
- triplesec 8y ago
  Can you suggest some better-informed sources for us? I'd be very interested in more nuanced available sources
  - AsyncAwait 8y ago
    I have several major news apps on my phone and what I've found is that they're all reporting the same story, with very similar biases, within minutes of each other. They all seem to drink from the same fountain. You'd basically need to know what biases which outlets have to what stories and apply a filter accordingly, which can be extremely time consuming.
    - xfitm3 8y ago
      What about the AP? They seem to be rooted in factual reporting.
      - AsyncAwait 8y ago
        With the AP, it depends heavily on the thing they're covering. Often times they try to give every side and are indeed pretty good, but then I noticed that i.e. when it comes to Palestine, they often run headlines like "Palestinians dead in Gaza", which implies that some Palestinians just dropped dead, while in reality the headline should have been "Israel shoots Palestinians in Gaza" or similar. They even did this when their own reporter, who was clearly marked PRESS was shot. Here's the story as reported by the AP[1], notice the headline: "AP cameraman shot during Gaza protest", no mention of Israel and might even give the impression that Gazans shot him. The vast majority of people only skim the headlines and AP knows this, so this is hardly an accident. 1 - https://www.apnews.com/65bd5c31690342b886ab5b8f72b37e53 https://www.apnews.com/65bd5c31690342b886ab5b8f72b37e53
        calvinbhai 8y ago
        Serious question: How is it possible for AP reporter to know the nationality of the shooter? To be honest "AP cameraman shot during Gaza protest" is a more accurate and correct reporting by the reporter. Isn't it? I have no bias in this conflict, I'm neither pro/anti palestenians/israelis, because I just cant wrap my head around it, and I refuse to believe what any major news media tries to feed people about this conflict. If all of AP reports are this unbiased, then probably I'll have to start subscribing to them.
- ako 8y ago
  This is what happens if we all want to consume news for free, cost of gathering news also has to go to zero...
ataturk 8y ago
Let me make something abundantly clear to you: There is no news outlet in existence that is free from bias. Not NPR, not BBC, not NBC, none of them. None. NONE. Zero. 0%. "News" at this moment in time is either propaganda or advertising and has nothing at all to do with any high-minded "un-biased" attempt to report information to a mass audience. You are their product--they wish to shape your mind and allow their paid for agenda to be promoted through you. You are on your own for finding out real, useful information. I suppose there are a few feel-good human interest stories about cats out there that aren't biased, however, the bias there is that those stories exist to sell ads to people who like soft stories--lacking the market for the ads, there would be no soft stories.

w1nt3rmu4e 8y ago

I've seen some truly awful journalism from Reuters. Articles that were so agenda driven as to almost laughably gloss over facts in order to present the desired narrative. (Laughable if reputations and money weren't on the line.) I've called some of the offending journalists out on social media, which I encourage everyone to do.

triplesec 8y ago
Can you suggest some better-informed sources for us? I'd be very interested in more nuanced available sources
- AsyncAwait 8y ago
  I have several major news apps on my phone and what I've found is that they're all reporting the same story, with very similar biases, within minutes of each other. They all seem to drink from the same fountain. You'd basically need to know what biases which outlets have to what stories and apply a filter accordingly, which can be extremely time consuming.
  - xfitm3 8y ago
    What about the AP? They seem to be rooted in factual reporting.
    - AsyncAwait 8y ago
      With the AP, it depends heavily on the thing they're covering. Often times they try to give every side and are indeed pretty good, but then I noticed that i.e. when it comes to Palestine, they often run headlines like "Palestinians dead in Gaza", which implies that some Palestinians just dropped dead, while in reality the headline should have been "Israel shoots Palestinians in Gaza" or similar. They even did this when their own reporter, who was clearly marked PRESS was shot. Here's the story as reported by the AP[1], notice the headline: "AP cameraman shot during Gaza protest", no mention of Israel and might even give the impression that Gazans shot him. The vast majority of people only skim the headlines and AP knows this, so this is hardly an accident. 1 - https://www.apnews.com/65bd5c31690342b886ab5b8f72b37e53 https://www.apnews.com/65bd5c31690342b886ab5b8f72b37e53
      - calvinbhai 8y ago
        Serious question: How is it possible for AP reporter to know the nationality of the shooter? To be honest "AP cameraman shot during Gaza protest" is a more accurate and correct reporting by the reporter. Isn't it? I have no bias in this conflict, I'm neither pro/anti palestenians/israelis, because I just cant wrap my head around it, and I refuse to believe what any major news media tries to feed people about this conflict. If all of AP reports are this unbiased, then probably I'll have to start subscribing to them.
ako 8y ago
This is what happens if we all want to consume news for free, cost of gathering news also has to go to zero...

ataturk 8y ago

Let me make something abundantly clear to you: There is no news outlet in existence that is free from bias. Not NPR, not BBC, not NBC, none of them. None. NONE. Zero. 0%. "News" at this moment in time is either propaganda or advertising and has nothing at all to do with any high-minded "un-biased" attempt to report information to a mass audience. You are their product--they wish to shape your mind and allow their paid for agenda to be promoted through you. You are on your own for finding out real, useful information. I suppose there are a few feel-good human interest stories about cats out there that aren't biased, however, the bias there is that those stories exist to sell ads to people who like soft stories--lacking the market for the ads, there would be no soft stories.