4 ms·
Someone should make a press transparency database/site. Keep it factual: list of a reporter’s previous articles and institutions; other affiliations; topics the
by Tycho 7y ago
Someone should make a press transparency database/site. Keep it factual: list of a reporter’s previous articles and institutions; other affiliations; topics they have covered repeatedly; stakeholders/owners of the institutions; co-occurrence of the same phrases in contemporary articles by other reporters; timing of articles compared with others on the same story; etc.
- dopylitty 7y agoThe problem is bootstrapping trust. Why would I trust this proposed site more than any random journalist? In fact I might trust it less because of how easy it is for any shady organization to set up a defamatory site masquerading as trustworthy and impartial.
- hhs 7y agoI also wonder about this scenario. You write: "because of how easy it is for any shady organization to set up a defamatory site masquerading as trustworthy and impartial." I can see emotions, confirmation bias and backfire effect playing a role by, as you note, "a defamatory site". I'm curious if there are options or solutions to counter this?
- Tycho 7y agoBecause it will use the incredible technology known as hyperlinks. The point is to collate publically available information into an accessible single location that will allow easy discovery of hidden agendas and conflicts of interest. You don’t have to trust the site for anything, it’s simply a jumping off point.
- mlb_hn 7y agoI'm doing my graduate work on that. It's hard. MIT has a cool project looking at how individual terms are covered though: https://www.media.mit.edu/projects/media-cloud/overview/ https://www.media.mit.edu/projects/media-cloud/overview/ The relationships when modeling from the author/publication get really big really quick. I suspect as NLP gets better it'll get easier to model though.