5 ms·
An interesting observation: If you have to censor your AI to protect against activists and journalists causing you problems, the political direction you have to
by Karunamon 4y ago
An interesting observation: If you have to censor your AI to protect against activists and journalists causing you problems, the political direction you have to censor against to accomplish that goal is strong evidence that the opposite political direction is held by journalists and activists.
This would seem to support the article's conclusion by another way.
- harimau777 4y agoI'm not sure that's necessarily the case. It's possible that the journalist or activist has a goal for attempting to cause problems that is unrelated to the specific topic they are generating text about. For example, the journalist may be motivated by a desire for a sensationalist story. The activist may be opposed to AI itself and is looking for any way to discredit it without caring about the specific topic.
- freejazz 4y agoJournalists write about what is newsworthy, not what personally offends them.
- Karunamon 4y agoGood journalists. Unfortunately there are a great many activists who call themselves journalists but really are not.
- freejazz 4y agoI'd venture that the vast majority of journalists do not get to choose their stories and are assigned them by editors.
- Karunamon 4y agoProbably, but story selection is the most minimal way to bias one's reporting. Also, every organization has their chosen politics so is also likely that the person the editor pass the story onto is there because they agree.
- freejazz 4y agoI completely disagree with all of your assertions. They are baseless and just culture war talking points.
- Karunamon 4y agoThe vast majority of this country has a distrust of the media (both TV and print) [1] and it's not because their reporting is high quality and evenhanded. In fact, given the partisan divide here (Independents and Republicans historically low trust, Democrats almost even with historic highs), I really think you should reconsider your knee-jerk dismissal. There aren't a lot of ways to square this circle if you eliminate all possibility of influence of partisan bias. [1] https://news.gallup.com/poll/403166/americans-trust-media-remains-near-record-low.aspx https://news.gallup.com/poll/403166/americans-trust-media-re...
- freejazz 4y agoYou'd have a point of there wasn't a reactionary movement against anything that was credentialed, or even against the concept of expertise. When you consider it that way, it really makes my point for me that you are just sounding off in the culture wars. It's your assertion that it's "not because their reporting is high quality or even handed" and it's not supported by anything save your "instinct".