3 ms·
you describe implicit bias and it's effect and it's cause. GP is surprised the article doesn't confirm their implicit bias. and then GP misattributes the surp
by froh 3y ago
you describe implicit bias and it's effect and it's cause.
GP is surprised the article doesn't confirm their implicit bias.
and then GP misattributes the surprise to "today's despicable journalism"??
nono. tons of quality journalism is fine. please go and think about your implicit bias.
just to be sure we talk about the same thing
https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/takeatouchtest.html https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/takeatouchtest.html
- Repulsion9513 3y agoOk, that's great that you're using a word for it. I could not possibly care any less. Why is it bad to assume that a US-centric site is writing a US-centric article when they put "feds" in the title? Why does there being an implicit bias towards expecting a US-centric site to produce US-centric articles, mean that the journalism is not misleading? It doesn't. It is misleading. It is clickbait. You are defending the indefensible.