4 ms·

That is brilliant. Also why "unbiased" reporting can never truly exist (however wonderful that would be). The choice to report something is itself a judgment

That is brilliant. Also why "unbiased" reporting can never truly exist (however wonderful that would be). The choice to report something is itself a judgment of the topic.

kazinator 3y ago
You can exercise judgment in choosing a topic: fair enough. Within that topic, you can present all the facts that you know, or just the ones that support a certain narrative.
- tptacek 3y ago
  The facts you know are also selected subjectively, both by yourself and by the people who make you available to those facts.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - TeMPOraL 3y ago
    Yes, and then bias is also a statistical phenomenon too, yadda yadda. But we all understand we're talking about the subset of bias that any specific actor can introduce due to ignorance or ulterior motives, and could in principle choose otherwise. Objectively unbiased reporting may be impossible, but intellectual honesty is possible, and should be required of people more.
    - zogrodea 3y ago
      Agreed. Even if one cannot achieve an ideal, there is no reason why one should not try their hardest to live up to it, instead of abandoning it as "all or nothing".
- paulddraper 3y ago
  > Within that topic, you can present all the facts that you know, or just the ones that support a certain narrative. Let's say you are reporting on the elevated rate of gun violence in Chicago compared to other US cities. Which of the following facts do you include in your story? (For sake of argument, assume these are factually accurate statements.) 1. Chicago votes predominately Democrat. 2. Chicago has a higher poverty rate than other cities. 3. Chicago has a large black and Hispanic population. 4. Chicago has more gangs than other cities.
  - mcpackieh 3y ago
    Why not all of those facts? It's only four short sentences, it won't take up much space on a printed newspaper let alone an online article. Throw in some more facts about American gun crime rates vs other countries for good measure, some facts comparing Chicago to other American cities, etc.
    - kazinator 3y ago
      If it's your intent to report facts about gun violence in Chicago, and only that, then dropping those other facts detracts from what you're doing. It makes it look like you're insinuating possible causes. Like that voting Democrat leads to gun violence, or that poverty causes gun violence, or that hispanics and blacks perpetrate gun violence. By mentioning certain remotely related facts, it looks as if you're hinting at giving an interpretation of the central facts. If you want to convey facts about a topic like gun violence in Chicago, then stick to facts closely relevant to it. Like different ways of slicing up the data. You might show a density map of where in Chicago most of it has happened over a certain period, or demographics about gun violence. Now if you want to explore a link between gun violence and something else like poverty, then you have to get your ducks in a row about that. Such a subject deserves to be treated by a sophisticated researcher with an expert background in statistics. If that researcher postulates some kind of link, they have to look at all the reasons why that might be false, not only true.
      - mcpackieh 3y ago
martythemaniak 3y ago
OurWorldInData.com is probably what unbiased "reporting" looks like, and obviously even they have to choose what to research and present.
- Spark_Ed 3y ago
  [flagged]
- timeagain 3y ago
  At a deeper level, that site presupposes that quantitative data is a good way to interpret the world. (I don’t disagree, mostly!) Of course some things are easier to turn into numbers than others.
  - natmaka 3y ago
    For some data there are multiples discordant sources, or critics directed to the unique source. Selecting (and therefore neglecting some) isn't neutral either. A real (non-disputable) consensus is very rare.
gotoeleven 3y ago
I don't think it's really that hard to report in a way that is unbiased enough to be useful. Just ask yourself, am I leaving out facts that my political opposite would think are relevant? But even just focusing on facts, however selected, would be better than what we have now which is a news media that decides what they want you to think first, and then reports or buries a story based on this.
- tptacek 3y ago
  It can be hard to even realize you're even being biased. As a professional journalist, just the fact that you're reporting on a region at all is a thumb your employer has put on the scale. It wouldn't be, were journalism evenly distributed across all conflicts, but there is no market for that kind of journalism, and so it isn't done. That doesn't mean people should disregard journalism done from "journalism hot spots". But it's an important thing to keep in mind, and I think it bears especially on the question of how much emotional valence we should want invested in stories.
- giraffe_lady 3y ago
  A view even allowing for a "political opposite" is already really limited for this purpose. What's the opposite of a christian anarchist? Is a soldier fighting a genocide its opposite, or is a pacifist? It's not that the model is useless but it's not very useful for this.

That is brilliant. Also why "unbiased" reporting can never truly exist (however wonderful that would be). The choice to report something is itself a judgment of the topic.

kazinator 3y ago

You can exercise judgment in choosing a topic: fair enough. Within that topic, you can present all the facts that you know, or just the ones that support a certain narrative.

tptacek 3y ago
The facts you know are also selected subjectively, both by yourself and by the people who make you available to those facts.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- TeMPOraL 3y ago
  Yes, and then bias is also a statistical phenomenon too, yadda yadda. But we all understand we're talking about the subset of bias that any specific actor can introduce due to ignorance or ulterior motives, and could in principle choose otherwise. Objectively unbiased reporting may be impossible, but intellectual honesty is possible, and should be required of people more.
  - zogrodea 3y ago
    Agreed. Even if one cannot achieve an ideal, there is no reason why one should not try their hardest to live up to it, instead of abandoning it as "all or nothing".
paulddraper 3y ago
> Within that topic, you can present all the facts that you know, or just the ones that support a certain narrative. Let's say you are reporting on the elevated rate of gun violence in Chicago compared to other US cities. Which of the following facts do you include in your story? (For sake of argument, assume these are factually accurate statements.) 1. Chicago votes predominately Democrat. 2. Chicago has a higher poverty rate than other cities. 3. Chicago has a large black and Hispanic population. 4. Chicago has more gangs than other cities.
- mcpackieh 3y ago
  Why not all of those facts? It's only four short sentences, it won't take up much space on a printed newspaper let alone an online article. Throw in some more facts about American gun crime rates vs other countries for good measure, some facts comparing Chicago to other American cities, etc.
  - kazinator 3y ago
    If it's your intent to report facts about gun violence in Chicago, and only that, then dropping those other facts detracts from what you're doing. It makes it look like you're insinuating possible causes. Like that voting Democrat leads to gun violence, or that poverty causes gun violence, or that hispanics and blacks perpetrate gun violence. By mentioning certain remotely related facts, it looks as if you're hinting at giving an interpretation of the central facts. If you want to convey facts about a topic like gun violence in Chicago, then stick to facts closely relevant to it. Like different ways of slicing up the data. You might show a density map of where in Chicago most of it has happened over a certain period, or demographics about gun violence. Now if you want to explore a link between gun violence and something else like poverty, then you have to get your ducks in a row about that. Such a subject deserves to be treated by a sophisticated researcher with an expert background in statistics. If that researcher postulates some kind of link, they have to look at all the reasons why that might be false, not only true.
    - mcpackieh 3y ago

martythemaniak 3y ago

OurWorldInData.com is probably what unbiased "reporting" looks like, and obviously even they have to choose what to research and present.

Spark_Ed 3y ago
[flagged]
timeagain 3y ago
At a deeper level, that site presupposes that quantitative data is a good way to interpret the world. (I don’t disagree, mostly!) Of course some things are easier to turn into numbers than others.
- natmaka 3y ago
  For some data there are multiples discordant sources, or critics directed to the unique source. Selecting (and therefore neglecting some) isn't neutral either. A real (non-disputable) consensus is very rare.

gotoeleven 3y ago

I don't think it's really that hard to report in a way that is unbiased enough to be useful. Just ask yourself, am I leaving out facts that my political opposite would think are relevant? But even just focusing on facts, however selected, would be better than what we have now which is a news media that decides what they want you to think first, and then reports or buries a story based on this.

tptacek 3y ago
It can be hard to even realize you're even being biased. As a professional journalist, just the fact that you're reporting on a region at all is a thumb your employer has put on the scale. It wouldn't be, were journalism evenly distributed across all conflicts, but there is no market for that kind of journalism, and so it isn't done. That doesn't mean people should disregard journalism done from "journalism hot spots". But it's an important thing to keep in mind, and I think it bears especially on the question of how much emotional valence we should want invested in stories.
giraffe_lady 3y ago
A view even allowing for a "political opposite" is already really limited for this purpose. What's the opposite of a christian anarchist? Is a soldier fighting a genocide its opposite, or is a pacifist? It's not that the model is useless but it's not very useful for this.