Regardless of where you stand on a situation, advocacy is unavoidable in political stories. You can be 100% factually correct, but still commit sins of advocacy

Regardless of where you stand on a situation, advocacy is unavoidable in political stories. You can be 100% factually correct, but still commit sins of advocacy and partisanship like omitting factual information or misrepresenting factual information. About the only comments that remain factually accurate without committing sins of advocacy in political stories are those that acknowledge that the issue is complicated, that there are many sides and that there isn't anything conclusive. The more certain/convicted about an issue a commenter comes, the more likely they are going to get downvoted in political stories. My observation is that those comments that practice the principle of charity with their interlocutors are those that are more likely to be upvoted. How you say something is more important than what you're saying if you're trying to reach common understanding in earnest. Technical stories generally don't have positions and advocacy except advocacy in favor of intellectual curiosity.