5 ms·

> with maybe a slight left leaning bias As someone with a conservative leaning bias, I would consider PBS to have a very strong left (whatever that means) lean

> with maybe a slight left leaning bias As someone with a conservative leaning bias, I would consider PBS to have a very strong left (whatever that means) leaning bias. I guess it depends on your start point.

tootie 5y ago
It has been said the reality has a liberal bias.
- jaywalk 5y ago
  ...by people who have a liberal bias.
  - uoaei 5y ago
    That's not really a helpful point. You've introduced a tautology. People who rely on faithful, factual descriptions of reality would be liberals if reality had a liberal bias and they interpreted reality accurately.
    - jaywalk 5y ago
      It's a completely BS statement, so I don't know what you're trying to say. It's not even possible for reality to have a bias in the first place. Reality just... is. It's the people who try to tell you what reality is that have biases.
      - tootie 5y ago
        It's glib, but the meaning is that rational observation tends to strongly disfavor conservative views. Things like climate denial and supply-side economics that are tentpoles of conservatism consistently fail to hold up to any level of scrutiny. Modern American republicans are currently hanging their hats on completely farcical assertions that the 2020 election was stolen and Democrats are all pedophiles. When an outlet like CNN reports the truth, they are going to appear liberal in comparison.
        jaywalk 5y ago
        I understand what the phrase is trying to convey. It's literally just saying "I agree with things that conform to my biases" though. You have a liberal bias, and you think conservatives are wrong? Wow, that's a first! And vice-versa.
        tootie 5y ago
        That's not what it means. It means that rational observation free of bias aligns more closely with liberal politics. Per the examples given: Scientific observation says climate change is real, man-made and an urgent threat. Liberals agree, conservatives don't. Maybe not to a person and maybe not with 100% fidelity to the science but the trend is unmistakable. Same for many other conservative fallacies like "tax cuts pay for themselves". We have data and know it isn't true. And current hot topics like election fraud. All the evidence says it's extremely rare. Liberals agree with the evidence, conservatives don't. That's not the entirety of the political divide and there's plenty of subjective and philosophical arguments irrespective of evidence but when it comes to justifying policy, one side relies on evidence one doesn't.
        mrkstu 5y ago
        No, both sides have different realities they don't like- Reality Progressives don't like: - Gender correlates with biology - Giving chronically homeless people housing won't fix their homelessness - Not charging serious crime won't lead to safer neighborhoods - You can't fix societal disparities by changing who is at the top and bottom of a pyramid of privilege - Demonizing the wealthy won't lead to any productive outcomes - The amount of GDP consumed by government already should be manifestly sufficient to fix the things government is capable of addressing efficiently - Universal Basic Income is a pipe dream with no mathematic or social basis in reality - Getting rid of religiosity without replacing it with another moral foundation will lead to progressively worse societal outcomes (and progressive thought is in no way an adequate replacement) - Shouting down unpopular opinion doesn't make those opinions go away Reality conservatives don't like: - Locking prisoners away for long periods leads to greater gangsterism and lifelong criminality - Racial disparities, whatever their source, need to be addressed systemically for society to prosper - Making huge changes to our atmospheric mix is 100% likely to lead to undesirable outcomes- the globe, and humans as part of it, will not prosper with large changes leading to unknowable outcomes in our biosphere - Education is essential to social mobility - Social safety nets are essential to social mobility - Free markets are rarely free of defect and tend towards capture, either regulatory or monopolistic, and need frequent intervention to function efficiently - Even if you've felt deceived by the media, making it a point of pride to doubt anything/everything you hear opens you up to those who will manipulate that doubt for their profit and power Either way, the smugness both sides have in being sure they are the 'righteous/scientific' side only opens them up to lack of self-reflection on whether their side is correct on a particular issue. If you're sure that your 'sides' agenda is correct top to bottom, you've assuredly sold yourself a bill of goods.
uoaei 5y ago
As someone who puts priority on distinguishing rhetorics vs facts, PBS is the furthest of the mainstream news outlets toward the "facts" end of the spectrum by a very large margin.
- atlasunshrugged 5y ago
  What about the BBC?
TooKool4This 5y ago
Yeah maybe. Are we talking about PBS overall or the Newshour segment? In PBS Newshour the upfront report by Judy is very much fact based. I agree though that the various mini-documentary parts of the segment are less direct-fact based reporting and bias starts to creep in. Anyways, I'm not too interested in starting an internet politics fight. The main takeaway from my post is that we should reevaluate what we are getting out of following the news obsessively.
TheCondor 5y ago
Is there anything concrete you can say about that bias and PBS News Hour? Or is it more just general "they're publicly funded and the left supports that" sort of bias? Are they disproportionately covering or ignoring issues due to that bias?
- geoduck14 5y ago
  I have one example. They were doing an article about why it is bad to legalize pig hunting. They quoted an "expert" who said "I've seen deer hunters, and they LOVE hunting deer... so I would expect anyone with a gun to release pigs in other people's land so they can hunt them" I happen to know several hunters, and that kind of accusation was pretty offensive and far from what actually happens in real life.
  - Tostino 5y ago
    This is the type of thing to overlook as being bias when you don't grow up in that culture that would be offended at the accusation. I watch the PBSNewsHour, but I absolutely recognize they have a bias on certain topics, and know I am unable to see the bias because I am too steeped in it on other topics. That is true no matter how "fact based" any reporting is. It isn't terribly hard to stick to "just the facts" and still leave readers/watchers with a very warped picture by putting greater emphasis on some facts while downplaying or outright ignoring others.

tootie 5y ago

It has been said the reality has a liberal bias.

jaywalk 5y ago
...by people who have a liberal bias.
- uoaei 5y ago
  That's not really a helpful point. You've introduced a tautology. People who rely on faithful, factual descriptions of reality would be liberals if reality had a liberal bias and they interpreted reality accurately.
  - jaywalk 5y ago
    It's a completely BS statement, so I don't know what you're trying to say. It's not even possible for reality to have a bias in the first place. Reality just... is. It's the people who try to tell you what reality is that have biases.
    - tootie 5y ago
      It's glib, but the meaning is that rational observation tends to strongly disfavor conservative views. Things like climate denial and supply-side economics that are tentpoles of conservatism consistently fail to hold up to any level of scrutiny. Modern American republicans are currently hanging their hats on completely farcical assertions that the 2020 election was stolen and Democrats are all pedophiles. When an outlet like CNN reports the truth, they are going to appear liberal in comparison.
      - jaywalk 5y ago
        I understand what the phrase is trying to convey. It's literally just saying "I agree with things that conform to my biases" though. You have a liberal bias, and you think conservatives are wrong? Wow, that's a first! And vice-versa.
        tootie 5y ago
        That's not what it means. It means that rational observation free of bias aligns more closely with liberal politics. Per the examples given: Scientific observation says climate change is real, man-made and an urgent threat. Liberals agree, conservatives don't. Maybe not to a person and maybe not with 100% fidelity to the science but the trend is unmistakable. Same for many other conservative fallacies like "tax cuts pay for themselves". We have data and know it isn't true. And current hot topics like election fraud. All the evidence says it's extremely rare. Liberals agree with the evidence, conservatives don't. That's not the entirety of the political divide and there's plenty of subjective and philosophical arguments irrespective of evidence but when it comes to justifying policy, one side relies on evidence one doesn't.
        mrkstu 5y ago
        No, both sides have different realities they don't like- Reality Progressives don't like: - Gender correlates with biology - Giving chronically homeless people housing won't fix their homelessness - Not charging serious crime won't lead to safer neighborhoods - You can't fix societal disparities by changing who is at the top and bottom of a pyramid of privilege - Demonizing the wealthy won't lead to any productive outcomes - The amount of GDP consumed by government already should be manifestly sufficient to fix the things government is capable of addressing efficiently - Universal Basic Income is a pipe dream with no mathematic or social basis in reality - Getting rid of religiosity without replacing it with another moral foundation will lead to progressively worse societal outcomes (and progressive thought is in no way an adequate replacement) - Shouting down unpopular opinion doesn't make those opinions go away Reality conservatives don't like: - Locking prisoners away for long periods leads to greater gangsterism and lifelong criminality - Racial disparities, whatever their source, need to be addressed systemically for society to prosper - Making huge changes to our atmospheric mix is 100% likely to lead to undesirable outcomes- the globe, and humans as part of it, will not prosper with large changes leading to unknowable outcomes in our biosphere - Education is essential to social mobility - Social safety nets are essential to social mobility - Free markets are rarely free of defect and tend towards capture, either regulatory or monopolistic, and need frequent intervention to function efficiently - Even if you've felt deceived by the media, making it a point of pride to doubt anything/everything you hear opens you up to those who will manipulate that doubt for their profit and power Either way, the smugness both sides have in being sure they are the 'righteous/scientific' side only opens them up to lack of self-reflection on whether their side is correct on a particular issue. If you're sure that your 'sides' agenda is correct top to bottom, you've assuredly sold yourself a bill of goods.

uoaei 5y ago

As someone who puts priority on distinguishing rhetorics vs facts, PBS is the furthest of the mainstream news outlets toward the "facts" end of the spectrum by a very large margin.

atlasunshrugged 5y ago
What about the BBC?

TooKool4This 5y ago

Yeah maybe. Are we talking about PBS overall or the Newshour segment? In PBS Newshour the upfront report by Judy is very much fact based. I agree though that the various mini-documentary parts of the segment are less direct-fact based reporting and bias starts to creep in. Anyways, I'm not too interested in starting an internet politics fight. The main takeaway from my post is that we should reevaluate what we are getting out of following the news obsessively.

TheCondor 5y ago

Is there anything concrete you can say about that bias and PBS News Hour? Or is it more just general "they're publicly funded and the left supports that" sort of bias? Are they disproportionately covering or ignoring issues due to that bias?

geoduck14 5y ago
I have one example. They were doing an article about why it is bad to legalize pig hunting. They quoted an "expert" who said "I've seen deer hunters, and they LOVE hunting deer... so I would expect anyone with a gun to release pigs in other people's land so they can hunt them" I happen to know several hunters, and that kind of accusation was pretty offensive and far from what actually happens in real life.
- Tostino 5y ago
  This is the type of thing to overlook as being bias when you don't grow up in that culture that would be offended at the accusation. I watch the PBSNewsHour, but I absolutely recognize they have a bias on certain topics, and know I am unable to see the bias because I am too steeped in it on other topics. That is true no matter how "fact based" any reporting is. It isn't terribly hard to stick to "just the facts" and still leave readers/watchers with a very warped picture by putting greater emphasis on some facts while downplaying or outright ignoring others.