5 ms·

Newspapers used to serve the function of establishing a shared set of knowledge about the world to readers. There was a limited range of options, depending on w

by _jal 5y ago

Newspapers used to serve the function of establishing a shared set of knowledge about the world to readers. There was a limited range of options, depending on where you were - usually a couple local papers and a couple national ones. Personalized news feeds destroy that commonality. Undoubtedly, those limited options were (and are) biased, and more solid information is available today. But that commonality had a value independent of conveying information. Aside from all of that, I don't want news sources trying to predict what I want to read, because a major aspect of my news reading is looking at how various sources are spinning things. I read a lot of material I disagree with. "Services" that try to guess how I prefer to be gaslit are counterproductive.

Fogest 5y ago
This is the issue. If you are already down a rabbit hole of beliefs you are going to keep seeing articles from news services biased towards your way of thinking. Things that continue to constantly confirm how you feel about the world. In an ideal world news organizations would just provide both sides of a side, but unfortunately in todays world news agencies seem incredibly polarized and twist stories to suite their agendas. This now makes personalized news feeds even more scary and further contributes to the kind of polarization we see happening now. People seem more divided then ever in the last 20-30 years.
riffraff 5y ago
I am not sure what time frame you're thinking of, but in my home country for most of the last centuries there were plenty of newspapers, often expounding news with a strong political bias, i.e. partys had their own newspaper. Personalized news feed are making this worse, but it's not a new thing.
3dbrows 5y ago
Strongly agree. Local newspapers contain “common myths” that underpin society: a local shared understanding of the world, where the technical veracity of that understanding is secondary to its promulgation. That is being lost by hyperpersonalisation at the cost of community bonding. If you think that’s a good thing, consider whether you trust (or even know) your neighbours. The tragedy of the commons is that nobody cares about the maintenance of the common good: I posit that the common good ought to include shared myths. Historically, this meant shared worldview and religion. Today, we are challenged to find other bases for trust in one another.
da_chicken 5y ago
> Personalized news feeds destroy that commonality. The web and partisan cable news channels have long since done away with that commonality. It's dead, buried, and cold in the ground. That's why it feels like one side of the political spectrum is living in the world of Fox News, Newsmax, OANN, and so on, while the other side is living in the world of CNN, MSNBC, Huffington, Vox, and so on. There are some very good attempts [0] to make media bias more visible, but people who have already decided that Fox and Newsmax are centrist and OANN is right-leaning are not going to evaluate things fairly anymore. [0]: https://www.allsides.com/media-bias/media-bias-chart https://www.allsides.com/media-bias/media-bias-chart
- LeoPanthera 5y ago
  I find that site too simplistic, since it does not try to gauge accuracy, only bias. The Adfontes Media Bias chart uses a two-axis system, plotting accuracy against bias, and inevitably ending up with most sources on an inverted-V shape: https://adfontesmedia.com https://adfontesmedia.com
  - LeftHandPath 5y ago
    The Adfontes chart is clever, but I always thought it must be distorted in and of itself -- they seem afraid to label any right-leaning source as "fact reporting", and any left-leaning source as "contains misleading info". The split is very visible in their article rankings[0]. What I trust most is Pew Research's (they are fairly centrist [1]) examination of the partisanship of a news outlet's audience, see: https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/2020/01/24/democrats-report-much-higher-levels-of-trust-in-a-number-of-news-sources-than-republicans/ https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/2020/01/24/democrats-... (note that there are several pages. I've linked to page 2.) Unfortunately, Pew's list is not consistently updated like the Adfontes chart and other media-bias checking sites. [0]: https://adfontesmedia.com/interactive-media-bias-chart/ https://adfontesmedia.com/interactive-media-bias-chart/ [1]: https://www.allsides.com/news-source/pew-research https://www.allsides.com/news-source/pew-research
- AareyBaba 5y ago
  I recently discovered https://ground.news/ https://ground.news/ which has a nice display of left/right coverage for each news article.

by _jal 5y ago

Fogest 5y ago

This is the issue. If you are already down a rabbit hole of beliefs you are going to keep seeing articles from news services biased towards your way of thinking. Things that continue to constantly confirm how you feel about the world. In an ideal world news organizations would just provide both sides of a side, but unfortunately in todays world news agencies seem incredibly polarized and twist stories to suite their agendas. This now makes personalized news feeds even more scary and further contributes to the kind of polarization we see happening now. People seem more divided then ever in the last 20-30 years.

riffraff 5y ago

I am not sure what time frame you're thinking of, but in my home country for most of the last centuries there were plenty of newspapers, often expounding news with a strong political bias, i.e. partys had their own newspaper. Personalized news feed are making this worse, but it's not a new thing.

3dbrows 5y ago

Strongly agree. Local newspapers contain “common myths” that underpin society: a local shared understanding of the world, where the technical veracity of that understanding is secondary to its promulgation. That is being lost by hyperpersonalisation at the cost of community bonding. If you think that’s a good thing, consider whether you trust (or even know) your neighbours. The tragedy of the commons is that nobody cares about the maintenance of the common good: I posit that the common good ought to include shared myths. Historically, this meant shared worldview and religion. Today, we are challenged to find other bases for trust in one another.

da_chicken 5y ago

> Personalized news feeds destroy that commonality. The web and partisan cable news channels have long since done away with that commonality. It's dead, buried, and cold in the ground. That's why it feels like one side of the political spectrum is living in the world of Fox News, Newsmax, OANN, and so on, while the other side is living in the world of CNN, MSNBC, Huffington, Vox, and so on. There are some very good attempts [0] to make media bias more visible, but people who have already decided that Fox and Newsmax are centrist and OANN is right-leaning are not going to evaluate things fairly anymore. [0]: https://www.allsides.com/media-bias/media-bias-chart https://www.allsides.com/media-bias/media-bias-chart

LeoPanthera 5y ago
I find that site too simplistic, since it does not try to gauge accuracy, only bias. The Adfontes Media Bias chart uses a two-axis system, plotting accuracy against bias, and inevitably ending up with most sources on an inverted-V shape: https://adfontesmedia.com https://adfontesmedia.com
- LeftHandPath 5y ago
  The Adfontes chart is clever, but I always thought it must be distorted in and of itself -- they seem afraid to label any right-leaning source as "fact reporting", and any left-leaning source as "contains misleading info". The split is very visible in their article rankings[0]. What I trust most is Pew Research's (they are fairly centrist [1]) examination of the partisanship of a news outlet's audience, see: https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/2020/01/24/democrats-report-much-higher-levels-of-trust-in-a-number-of-news-sources-than-republicans/ https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/2020/01/24/democrats-... (note that there are several pages. I've linked to page 2.) Unfortunately, Pew's list is not consistently updated like the Adfontes chart and other media-bias checking sites. [0]: https://adfontesmedia.com/interactive-media-bias-chart/ https://adfontesmedia.com/interactive-media-bias-chart/ [1]: https://www.allsides.com/news-source/pew-research https://www.allsides.com/news-source/pew-research
AareyBaba 5y ago
I recently discovered https://ground.news/ https://ground.news/ which has a nice display of left/right coverage for each news article.