3 ms·

> I'd hate to come out and say "NPR lies" as it gets people's hackles up and immediately starts the us-vs-them dynamic. "Non-Neutral" seems to have been the bes

> I'd hate to come out and say "NPR lies" as it gets people's hackles up and immediately starts the us-vs-them dynamic. "Non-Neutral" seems to have been the best way in recent years to indicate that their reporting is, at best, slanted and spun in order to present a view of the world that they prefer. I think this is a reasonably good faith revision: > NPR lies. Non-Neutral is the best way to indicate that their reporting presents their different/false world view. "Non-neutral" is the word you are using to indicate that NPR is not reporting what you believe. People who agree with you are neutral. People who disagree are non-neutral. Non-neutral is just a fancy way to call someone a liar while avoiding having to support your accusation with reasoning because it is self evident that having any opinion at all makes an entity non-neutral.

peanutcrisis 4y ago
As someone outside of the anglosphere who has been consuming news from left-leaning sources, there is a sudden shift in the type of language used and the kind of topics that would make it to the headlines. This is an observable phenomena, and when news is conveyed to make facts appear to imply only a specific set of outcomes (i.e. stretching your case), calling it non-neutral seems justified. As such, I think it's odd to characterize anyone who recognizes this as a solipsist. An example of how sophistry allows one to preserve facts while conveying a narrative that does not entail from them: https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2022/04/17/yes-virginia-the-new-york-times-is-woke/ https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2022/04/17/yes-virginia-the-n...
- hayst4ck 4y ago
  > sudden shift in the type of language used and the kind of topics that would make it to the headlines. I am going to assume that is true and assume your judgement is correct. Why do you think that is the case? What is your model for why there was a change in "neutrality"?

peanutcrisis 4y ago

As someone outside of the anglosphere who has been consuming news from left-leaning sources, there is a sudden shift in the type of language used and the kind of topics that would make it to the headlines. This is an observable phenomena, and when news is conveyed to make facts appear to imply only a specific set of outcomes (i.e. stretching your case), calling it non-neutral seems justified. As such, I think it's odd to characterize anyone who recognizes this as a solipsist. An example of how sophistry allows one to preserve facts while conveying a narrative that does not entail from them: https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2022/04/17/yes-virginia-the-new-york-times-is-woke/ https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2022/04/17/yes-virginia-the-n...

hayst4ck 4y ago
> sudden shift in the type of language used and the kind of topics that would make it to the headlines. I am going to assume that is true and assume your judgement is correct. Why do you think that is the case? What is your model for why there was a change in "neutrality"?