4 ms·
What, exactly, is unbiased reporting?
by bmmayer1 7y ago
What, exactly, is unbiased reporting?
- nkozyra 7y agoAn unattainable ideal, sure, but one that noble media organizations can aspire to. Notably through: open editorial processes, balanced sourcing and attribution, a robust correction policy, a non-combative relationship with readers, use of a neutral styleguide, eschewing advertorial content and NO EDITORIALS/OPINION PIECES.
- bmmayer1 7y agoCould you give an example of a "noble media organization" that comes the closest, in your view, to achieving this goal?
- nkozyra 7y agoI don't think any comes that close. Most are stuck in an unfortunate race to the bottom against cheap social/internet/clickbait news and the shackles of archaic old media.
- Mediterraneo10 7y agoThe Weather Channel?
- nkozyra 7y agoTongue in cheek, but they have really mastered clickbait
- ars 7y agoReuters
- kristianc 7y agoThe FT
- chrisseaton 7y agoI think the FT is biased in favour of free markets and globalisation.
- kristianc 7y agoMost of the economics profession is biased in favour of some regulated form of free markets and globalization. That's a bit like saying scientists are biased in favour of anthropic climate change: it's a rational bias based on 200 years of evidence.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- exolymph 7y agoNot every value that people hold is economically reducible.
- kristianc 7y agoIn the FT's case, it is. The FT doesn't 'know a lot', it largely reflects the mainstream consensus of the economics literature and think tanks - which are broadly pro market with regulation, in line with much of the economics profession. The FT has come out and said that if most of the economics literature was in favour of Brexit, they would have been too, but it wasn't, so they weren't. There was a lot of concern with Nikkei's investment in the FT that that would no longer be the case and that it would kowtow to it's corporate owners - if proved not to be the case.
- pytester 7y ago>Most of the economics profession is biased in favour of some regulated form of free markets and globalization. >That's a bit like saying scientists are biased in favour of anthropic climate change: it's a rational bias based on 200 years of evidence. The economics profession is biased in favour of that because the think tank money, sourced from corporate wealth, wants that. It's a pretty irrational bias which has led to, among other things, the mainstream of the profession being completely blindsided by the financial crisis (famously called out by the normally apolitical Queen) as well as the meteoric rise of China via highly managed trade (an anti free market policy treated by most economists in the 90s/early 00s as largely self defeating).
- secabeen 7y agoAP/Reuters for basic stories. https://www.adfontesmedia.com/ https://www.adfontesmedia.com/
- SeanLuke 7y agoC-SPAN
- munk-a 7y agoI think opinion pieces and editorials can be included as long as they are clearly marked and delineated from the actual news. In fact, I think it's almost impossible to write an unopinionated news story as choosing to write a story is an opinion of itself - the clearer we can isolate these opinions the better.
- nkozyra 7y agoThe problem is these tend to reinforce opinions people have about an organization or "the media" even when clearly denoted.
- munk-a 7y agoI'd like to imagine there's some way for society to recover to the state of semi-trusted media, maybe we just need to have enough voices that the truth comes out in majority - like industry run newspapers, the cotton lobby's paper is clearly biased on this article about reducing fabric tariff's from mexico but the jeweler's quarterly newspaper doesn't have a vested interest. As I said, it's a hard problem. I like the discussion on trying to find an answer though!
- secabeen 7y agoThe challenge is that even when clearly marked as opinion, they still accrue to the reputation of the publication. If you look at the Most Read links on WaPo or NYT, the opinion pieces are often more than half.
- achenatx 7y agoone of the easiest ways is to avoid using most adjectives. Not taking a point of view, not speculating, not predicting the future. Limit the use of verbs with strong negative or positive connotations. Stick to what people did, what they said, and let people draw their own conclusions. Story selection is also a form of bias. <<The usual tensions between reporters and government representatives have escalated to extreme levels in the Trump age, due largely to the President's near-daily attacks against the media. His portrayal of the people who cover him as his "enemy" and the "enemy of the people" has been denounced by historians, press freedom advocates and politicians in both parties.>>
- s_y_n_t_a_x 7y agoThat's something you should have learnt in grade school.