5 ms·

> unfortunately the biases comes out as we are all human Can you point to an example of any recent article in any US paper that even tries to be objective? Onl

> unfortunately the biases comes out as we are all human Can you point to an example of any recent article in any US paper that even tries to be objective? Only the BBC pretends to strive for that nowadays.

monadic2 7y ago
> Only the BBC pretends to strive for that nowadays. This remark is hugely ironic if you followed the recent UK election, but they at least have an outside perspective in the US.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
ddsea 7y ago
Some will disagree with such a glorious assessment of BBC. Often they don't even pretend. [1](https://bbcwatch.org/ https://bbcwatch.org/) [2](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_BBC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_BBC)
secabeen 7y ago
Here's a pretty straightforward, factual article about the spread of coronavirus: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/24/health/chicago-coronavirus-cdc.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/24/health/chicago-coronaviru... It clearly describes the spread of the disease in the US, including cited quotations from officials at the CDC and other health experts. It provides some useful additional facts about other similar diseases, and projections about how this disease could spread. Seems objective to me.
- buboard 7y ago
  an article about a virus?? color me skeptical that it's the rule rather than the exception
Knulp 7y ago
Thing is objectivity can't be reached and Lehrer's says it : the only thing yyou can do is try and be fair. It's a big misconception that medias were objective before. Newspapers have always had political leanings (clear and revendicated as the identity of the magazine) and that just never stopped. To say a media isn't objective with their political coverage is actually the norm and what should be expected. Now if a media trumps a fact in favor of an argument in a paper that explain science, that's wrong. But actually I don't think any media does that (never on purpose. And mistakes usually are corrected).
- thu2111 7y ago
  To say a media isn't objective with their political coverage is actually the norm and what should be expected. I think that depends where in the world you live. In the UK all news broadcasters are required to be neutral and objective by law. They aren't and the relevant regulator is MIA, probably because it's staffed with people who agree with the broadcaster's biases. But it's certainly not the norm there that "people" say media isn't objective. Lots of people still like to claim the BBC at least is objective, despite reams of retired or former journalists going on record to say it isn't.

monadic2 7y ago

> Only the BBC pretends to strive for that nowadays. This remark is hugely ironic if you followed the recent UK election, but they at least have an outside perspective in the US.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

ddsea 7y ago

Some will disagree with such a glorious assessment of BBC. Often they don't even pretend. [1](https://bbcwatch.org/ https://bbcwatch.org/) [2](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_BBC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_BBC)

secabeen 7y ago

Here's a pretty straightforward, factual article about the spread of coronavirus: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/24/health/chicago-coronavirus-cdc.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/24/health/chicago-coronaviru... It clearly describes the spread of the disease in the US, including cited quotations from officials at the CDC and other health experts. It provides some useful additional facts about other similar diseases, and projections about how this disease could spread. Seems objective to me.

buboard 7y ago
an article about a virus?? color me skeptical that it's the rule rather than the exception

Knulp 7y ago

Thing is objectivity can't be reached and Lehrer's says it : the only thing yyou can do is try and be fair. It's a big misconception that medias were objective before. Newspapers have always had political leanings (clear and revendicated as the identity of the magazine) and that just never stopped. To say a media isn't objective with their political coverage is actually the norm and what should be expected. Now if a media trumps a fact in favor of an argument in a paper that explain science, that's wrong. But actually I don't think any media does that (never on purpose. And mistakes usually are corrected).

thu2111 7y ago
To say a media isn't objective with their political coverage is actually the norm and what should be expected. I think that depends where in the world you live. In the UK all news broadcasters are required to be neutral and objective by law. They aren't and the relevant regulator is MIA, probably because it's staffed with people who agree with the broadcaster's biases. But it's certainly not the norm there that "people" say media isn't objective. Lots of people still like to claim the BBC at least is objective, despite reams of retired or former journalists going on record to say it isn't.