5 ms·

> Call me a dreamer, but I believe unbiased reporting should be the goal of journalism and I associate a "political bent" with poor quality. If you want "unbia

by sgift 7y ago

> Call me a dreamer, but I believe unbiased reporting should be the goal of journalism and I associate a "political bent" with poor quality. If you want "unbiased reporting" you get articles like: Angela Merkel ate Aspargus yesterday. That's unbiased. It's also irrelevant. Anything more interesting will always have a bias as long as it is written by humans.

ljf 7y ago
For (largely) unbiased reporting read the Financial Times - https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/financial-times/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/financial-times/ The Guardian do pretty well: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-guardian/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-guardian/ - but are well known to be left leaning
- MrsPeaches 7y ago
  Financial Times have a very strong bias towards liberal economic policy. They support de-regulation and reduced state involvement in markets. Similar to the econmist.
  - gridlockd 7y ago
    > Financial Times have a very strong bias towards liberal economic policy Economics itself has a strong bias towards liberal economic policy. Would you call "Nature" biased for not giving creationism a platform?
    - omnimus 7y ago
      Left is wrong just like creationism and liberal economic policy is right just like nature. Now i get it.
      - gridlockd 7y ago
        "Left" doesn't imply illiberal economic policy at all, though one might get that impression when dealing with all these vocal armchair marxists that haven't actually read any economics.
    - hellllllllooo 7y ago
      If you're equating modern economic policy with hard science you're making a pretty big stretch.
      - gridlockd 7y ago
        I'm not. Economics can never be a hard science. Neither can sociology, or psychology, or even medicine. Shall we dismiss these fields altogether on those grounds? That would be foolish.
gridlockd 7y ago
> Anything more interesting will always have a bias as long as it is written by humans. While that is technically true, it's also a completely meaningless objection. Like I said, being unbiased is the goal. It's an ideal. For comparison, even though it may be technically impossible to have zero lead in drinking water, your goal is still to minimize it.
gambler 7y ago
The notion that reasonable reporting is some kind of unattainable ephemeral ideal is obvious nonsense pushed forward by ideologues. Before 2014 most of the mainstream media were keeping their biases in check. It doesn't mean they had no biases or that they were always objective, but they tried. Today they simply don't. It is normal to pepper news articles with expletives, inject political rants into unrelated subjects and do wild speculation. It's not like all the news articles from before 6 years ago have been lost in a fire. One can still go and read them. Even look at front page snapshots via archive.org. The different is astounding.

by sgift 7y ago

ljf 7y ago

For (largely) unbiased reporting read the Financial Times - https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/financial-times/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/financial-times/ The Guardian do pretty well: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-guardian/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-guardian/ - but are well known to be left leaning

MrsPeaches 7y ago
Financial Times have a very strong bias towards liberal economic policy. They support de-regulation and reduced state involvement in markets. Similar to the econmist.
- gridlockd 7y ago
  > Financial Times have a very strong bias towards liberal economic policy Economics itself has a strong bias towards liberal economic policy. Would you call "Nature" biased for not giving creationism a platform?
  - omnimus 7y ago
    Left is wrong just like creationism and liberal economic policy is right just like nature. Now i get it.
    - gridlockd 7y ago
      "Left" doesn't imply illiberal economic policy at all, though one might get that impression when dealing with all these vocal armchair marxists that haven't actually read any economics.
  - hellllllllooo 7y ago
    If you're equating modern economic policy with hard science you're making a pretty big stretch.
    - gridlockd 7y ago
      I'm not. Economics can never be a hard science. Neither can sociology, or psychology, or even medicine. Shall we dismiss these fields altogether on those grounds? That would be foolish.

gridlockd 7y ago

> Anything more interesting will always have a bias as long as it is written by humans. While that is technically true, it's also a completely meaningless objection. Like I said, being unbiased is the goal. It's an ideal. For comparison, even though it may be technically impossible to have zero lead in drinking water, your goal is still to minimize it.

gambler 7y ago

The notion that reasonable reporting is some kind of unattainable ephemeral ideal is obvious nonsense pushed forward by ideologues. Before 2014 most of the mainstream media were keeping their biases in check. It doesn't mean they had no biases or that they were always objective, but they tried. Today they simply don't. It is normal to pepper news articles with expletives, inject political rants into unrelated subjects and do wild speculation. It's not like all the news articles from before 6 years ago have been lost in a fire. One can still go and read them. Even look at front page snapshots via archive.org. The different is astounding.