Objectivity and bias in media

I didn’t know I had a single dedicated journalist serving my needs, or that it’s this guy :joy:

Yawn. Weak rhetoric man. If you’re lonely just say so and we can talk, but this? nah.

If I were I might call this GOP trolling guy, seems like a fun dude!

Interesting study here…

The study published this week and authored by Ohio State professors Kelly Garrett and Robert Bond found conservatives were more prone to accept falsehoods, less inclined to believe true statements and less able to tell the difference between truth and lies.

For example, 41% of Republicans believed the false claim that Hillary Clinton colluded with Russia and sold part of the U.S. uranium supply in exchange for donations to the Clinton Foundation. Just 2% of Democrats said it was true.

Researchers distilled both true and false claims from viral news stories on social media and asked around 1,200 participants to assess them. Sources included major news networks, partisan news sources and satirical news sites such as The Onion and The Babylon Bee.

Garrett said the study doesn’t necessarily prove that conservatives are more biased than liberals, because all participants believed statements that boosted their political party — and rejected those that didn’t. But claims that benefited Republicans were more likely to be false, while true statements frequently furthered Democratic interests.

This puts conservatives at a disadvantage because they’re ultimately exposed to more misinformation, Garrett said, and confirmation bias makes them more inclined to buy what they see. It’s not clear why false information is more favorable to Republicans.

“Conservatives’ consistently poor performance in distinguishing truths from falsehoods appears to be largely explained by the fact that widely shared falsehoods were systematically more supportive of conservatives’ political positions,” the authors wrote.

Yes, because there’s a whole symbiotic cycle between the disinformation media industry and conservative politicians who both cite and feed it information simultaneously. A byproduct of the combination of a thirst for power and lack of actual policy/ideas, of course.

1 Like

Well this is setting up an interesting dynamic. FOX is not going to cover Trump. For now.

Hard to figure how they measure this. You have to think next GOP candidate, who won’t be Trump, will still be tied to/approved by him.

I guess they can not cover Trump talking, he can still endorse a Desantis or whomever and they will mention that a lot, and they still keep their hands clean and mostly pretend there’s no connection. If anyone can straddle that fence, FOX can.

CNN is tanking:grin:

If most Americans are either getting their news from Hannity or Maddow, I’m sadly glad to be boning up on my Mandarin…

2 Likes

加油! :grin:

would you prefer, gladly sad?

You obviously need more motivation. If you get low marks your next exam, your punishment is ten straight hours of Chris Cuomo and Don Lemon.

1 Like

That’s cruel.

https://thumbs.gfycat.com/NaughtyCooperativeDutchshepherddog-max-1mb.gif

https://thumbs.gfycat.com/BitesizedHeartfeltAmurminnow-max-1mb.gif

https://taibbi.substack.com/p/congratulations-elitists-liberals

Real stealth.

CORRECTION
Earlier versions of this story and its headline inaccurately characterized comments by Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) regarding the origins of the coronavirus. The term “debunked” and The Post’s use of “conspiracy theory” have been removed because, then as now, there was no determination about the origins of the virus.

Stop spying on our leakees!

1 Like
3 Likes

I heard these guys left the Hill I think, looks like they’re getting a lot of YT views.

Yes. I really liked them on The Hill, and they should be even better now that they’re completely independent.

1 Like
4 Likes

Over and over we see the central truth: the corporate outlets that most loudly and shrilly denounce “disinformation” — to the point of demanding online censorship and de-platforming in the name of combating it — are, in fact, the ones who spread disinformation most frequently and destructively.

This is they key takeaway, in how it relates to Facebook, Google, Twitter and the rest of the “news”. They are calling for more tools to tackle fake news, while they themselves are the biggest purveyors of non stop fake news.

To the skeptical such as myself, they are not looking at a means to stop fake news. They are looking for a means to stop the truth from exposing their fake propaganda talking points.

2 Likes

At a June 2 Press Conference, then-Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) proclaimed with anger: “last night I watched as President Trump, having gassed peaceful protesters just so he could do this photo op, then he went on to teargas priests who were helping protesters in Lafayette Park.” Speaking on MSNBC’s Morning Joe , House Speaker Nancy Pelosi exclaimed: “What is this, a banana republic?,” when asked about NBC News’ report that “security forces used tear gas and flash-bangs against a crowd of peaceful demonstrators to clear the area for the president.”

bwahaha

3 Likes