5 ms·

>Connecting people to authoritative information Top channels from picture. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com https://mediabiasfactcheck.com ABC: Left of Center

>Connecting people to authoritative information Top channels from picture. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com https://mediabiasfactcheck.com ABC: Left of Center NBC: Left of Center USA today: Left of Center CNN: Left CBS: Left of Center The "Authoritative Sources" are all Left-wing news agencies. So in other words they have done like Wikipedia. They have determined that Left of Center is authoritative and have limited the reach of alternative viewpoints. Their right to control political speech on their platform.

mmastrac 6y ago
Or alternatively, the center in the US is so far right that media naturally falls to the left of that.
- rayiner 6y ago
  To the right under what rubric? In Germany, I have a legal right to have my kid given religious education in public schools. Bavaria can put crosses on public buildings. Abortion is only decriminalized, generally illegal after 12 weeks, and is subject to waiting periods and mandatory counseling. The governing center-right party declared accepting Muslim refugees "a mistake" that they would not repeat. The American media demonized Amy Coney Barrett as a "Handmaid" because of the possibility that she could rule that elective abortion is a matter for the legislature, not a constitutional issue of fundamental rights. Which is the law of the land in Canada, France, Italy, Austria, and the EU Human Rights Court. At least on social issues, the American media is significantly to the left of even moderately liberal EU countries.
  - MisterBastahrd 6y ago
    The American media accurately described Barrett's publicly stated opinion on religious issues and abortion.
  - shakezula 6y ago
    You're purposefully diminishing the impact that opinion has, though. It would be a different matter if the legislature was prepared for that, but it's not. Like it or not, the battle for abortion was fought with the Supreme Court. Saying "she just has a different view on where it should be fought" ignores the fact that it would essentially set us back 50 years in terms of reproductive rights.
    - xyzzyz 6y ago
      > It would be a different matter if the legislature was prepared for that, but it's not. Plenty of states allowed abortion before Roe v. Wade. If legislature isn't prepared, what are they waiting for? Just pass the relevant bills already, so that impact of a potential Supreme Court verdict that returns the control to legislatures has absolutely zero consequences, because the state legislature already has enshrined the current status quo into law. What's the problem? > Like it or not, the battle for abortion was fought with the Supreme Court. Yes, and this is fundamentally wrong approach to issues on which there is no broad public agreement. > Saying "she just has a different view on where it should be fought" ignores the fact that it would essentially set us back 50 years in terms of reproductive rights. So would moving to, say, Canada or Sweden, which hardly makes it sound like a disaster.
      - joshuamorton 6y ago
        > Yes, and this is fundamentally wrong approach to issues on which there is no broad public agreement. Two important things here: 1. The judiciary exists to protect the rights of the people protected by the constitution, even when there may not be broad public support for those rights, even when those rights are unpopular. That's what happened with Brown v. BoE 2. 61% of Americans think that abortion should be legal in all or most cases. That is, 39% think it should be illegal. To compare, 49% think that burning the American Flag should be illegal, which the court has had no problem defending, and no one seems to consider was wrong for the court to decide. > So would moving to, say, Canada or Sweden, which hardly makes it sound like a disaster. Huh? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Morgentaler https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Morgentaler)
- sleepysysadmin 6y ago
  >Or alternatively, the center in the US is so far right that media naturally falls to the left of that. I provided the website which indicates the bias. You can use the same site to find right of center or right biased news. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/forbes/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/forbes/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/new-york-post/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/new-york-post/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/fox-news/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/fox-news/ The point I am making. Youtube clearly have a Left of Center bias and have indicated they are restricting other viewpoints. This is intentional and you get to decide if you like them doing this.
rayiner 6y ago
For people who doubt your characterization of where the "center" is, consider this: 2/3 of Americans oppose the Supreme Court decision banning school prayer. Is your idea of a "centrist" person someone who believes school prayer would be a good idea if the law were different?
- scarmig 6y ago
  The median voter also supports single payer healthcare and [insert lots of extreme opinions supported by the median voter here]. Centrist designates something approximating "elite public opinion," not any actual idealized voter who falls in the middle in all his attitudes. And once you accept that centrist is simply the designator for elite public opinion, most corporate media is clearly centrist, because they're basically clearinghouses for elite public opinion.
- sleepysysadmin 6y ago
  >For people who doubt your characterization of where the "center" is, consider this: 2/3 of Americans oppose the Supreme Court decision banning school prayer. Is your idea of a "centrist" person someone who believes school prayer would be a good idea if the law were different? I provided the website from which I got those details. I don't know how they come to these conclusions but I would tend to find that they are correct.
  - morsch 6y ago
    Well, if you had checked your source before spreading it, you'd know they just make it up. It's completely subjective, it's just whatever the owners feel like. For instance, here's something they don't do: take a random sample of a source's news articles, anonymize the source, ask random people to rate them, and collate the ratings into an overall rating. I'm not saying that'd be a good way to do it, but at least it'd be something. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/methodology/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/methodology/
- titzer 6y ago
  There is no Supreme Court decision banning school prayer. There is a Supreme Court decision[1] that upheld the traditional separation of church and state and interpreted the First Amendment to mean that state-run schools cannot force children to participate in a prayer. In particular, state legislation mandating prayer violated the Establishment Clause. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engel_v._Vitale https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engel_v._Vitale
rat87 6y ago
WSJ minus the editorial pages is pretty good Who's fault is it that the conserative movement has become more and more detached from facts?
- sleepysysadmin 6y ago
  >Who's fault is it that the conserative movement has become more and more detached from facts? This is a very interesting subject. I read an article like: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/26/opinion/republican-disinformation.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/26/opinion/republican-disinf... The interesting thing is that the assertion is that the right-wing have been detached from reality. An epistemological crisis wherein the the blame is on the internet. Thus we have situation where Internet entities like Youtube and Twitter are actively censoring right-wing views. While allowing left-wing misinformation. So the way forward to fixing wrong-think is to deprive people of viewpoints? This doesn't seem quite right. What's also quite interesting, it's the left-wing who are at odds. The median democrat has moved left and has created a political divide. Makes me wonder if perhaps it's not the rightwing who became detached from reality. If the left-wing are the ones detached. Then their need to censor other viewpoints to maintain their bubble makes complete sense.

mmastrac 6y ago

Or alternatively, the center in the US is so far right that media naturally falls to the left of that.

rayiner 6y ago
To the right under what rubric? In Germany, I have a legal right to have my kid given religious education in public schools. Bavaria can put crosses on public buildings. Abortion is only decriminalized, generally illegal after 12 weeks, and is subject to waiting periods and mandatory counseling. The governing center-right party declared accepting Muslim refugees "a mistake" that they would not repeat. The American media demonized Amy Coney Barrett as a "Handmaid" because of the possibility that she could rule that elective abortion is a matter for the legislature, not a constitutional issue of fundamental rights. Which is the law of the land in Canada, France, Italy, Austria, and the EU Human Rights Court. At least on social issues, the American media is significantly to the left of even moderately liberal EU countries.
- MisterBastahrd 6y ago
  The American media accurately described Barrett's publicly stated opinion on religious issues and abortion.
- shakezula 6y ago
  You're purposefully diminishing the impact that opinion has, though. It would be a different matter if the legislature was prepared for that, but it's not. Like it or not, the battle for abortion was fought with the Supreme Court. Saying "she just has a different view on where it should be fought" ignores the fact that it would essentially set us back 50 years in terms of reproductive rights.
  - xyzzyz 6y ago
    > It would be a different matter if the legislature was prepared for that, but it's not. Plenty of states allowed abortion before Roe v. Wade. If legislature isn't prepared, what are they waiting for? Just pass the relevant bills already, so that impact of a potential Supreme Court verdict that returns the control to legislatures has absolutely zero consequences, because the state legislature already has enshrined the current status quo into law. What's the problem? > Like it or not, the battle for abortion was fought with the Supreme Court. Yes, and this is fundamentally wrong approach to issues on which there is no broad public agreement. > Saying "she just has a different view on where it should be fought" ignores the fact that it would essentially set us back 50 years in terms of reproductive rights. So would moving to, say, Canada or Sweden, which hardly makes it sound like a disaster.
    - joshuamorton 6y ago
      > Yes, and this is fundamentally wrong approach to issues on which there is no broad public agreement. Two important things here: 1. The judiciary exists to protect the rights of the people protected by the constitution, even when there may not be broad public support for those rights, even when those rights are unpopular. That's what happened with Brown v. BoE 2. 61% of Americans think that abortion should be legal in all or most cases. That is, 39% think it should be illegal. To compare, 49% think that burning the American Flag should be illegal, which the court has had no problem defending, and no one seems to consider was wrong for the court to decide. > So would moving to, say, Canada or Sweden, which hardly makes it sound like a disaster. Huh? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Morgentaler https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Morgentaler)
sleepysysadmin 6y ago
>Or alternatively, the center in the US is so far right that media naturally falls to the left of that. I provided the website which indicates the bias. You can use the same site to find right of center or right biased news. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/forbes/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/forbes/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/new-york-post/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/new-york-post/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/fox-news/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/fox-news/ The point I am making. Youtube clearly have a Left of Center bias and have indicated they are restricting other viewpoints. This is intentional and you get to decide if you like them doing this.

rayiner 6y ago

For people who doubt your characterization of where the "center" is, consider this: 2/3 of Americans oppose the Supreme Court decision banning school prayer. Is your idea of a "centrist" person someone who believes school prayer would be a good idea if the law were different?

scarmig 6y ago
The median voter also supports single payer healthcare and [insert lots of extreme opinions supported by the median voter here]. Centrist designates something approximating "elite public opinion," not any actual idealized voter who falls in the middle in all his attitudes. And once you accept that centrist is simply the designator for elite public opinion, most corporate media is clearly centrist, because they're basically clearinghouses for elite public opinion.
sleepysysadmin 6y ago
>For people who doubt your characterization of where the "center" is, consider this: 2/3 of Americans oppose the Supreme Court decision banning school prayer. Is your idea of a "centrist" person someone who believes school prayer would be a good idea if the law were different? I provided the website from which I got those details. I don't know how they come to these conclusions but I would tend to find that they are correct.
- morsch 6y ago
  Well, if you had checked your source before spreading it, you'd know they just make it up. It's completely subjective, it's just whatever the owners feel like. For instance, here's something they don't do: take a random sample of a source's news articles, anonymize the source, ask random people to rate them, and collate the ratings into an overall rating. I'm not saying that'd be a good way to do it, but at least it'd be something. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/methodology/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/methodology/
titzer 6y ago
There is no Supreme Court decision banning school prayer. There is a Supreme Court decision[1] that upheld the traditional separation of church and state and interpreted the First Amendment to mean that state-run schools cannot force children to participate in a prayer. In particular, state legislation mandating prayer violated the Establishment Clause. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engel_v._Vitale https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engel_v._Vitale

rat87 6y ago

WSJ minus the editorial pages is pretty good Who's fault is it that the conserative movement has become more and more detached from facts?

sleepysysadmin 6y ago
>Who's fault is it that the conserative movement has become more and more detached from facts? This is a very interesting subject. I read an article like: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/26/opinion/republican-disinformation.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/26/opinion/republican-disinf... The interesting thing is that the assertion is that the right-wing have been detached from reality. An epistemological crisis wherein the the blame is on the internet. Thus we have situation where Internet entities like Youtube and Twitter are actively censoring right-wing views. While allowing left-wing misinformation. So the way forward to fixing wrong-think is to deprive people of viewpoints? This doesn't seem quite right. What's also quite interesting, it's the left-wing who are at odds. The median democrat has moved left and has created a political divide. Makes me wonder if perhaps it's not the rightwing who became detached from reality. If the left-wing are the ones detached. Then their need to censor other viewpoints to maintain their bubble makes complete sense.