Lemmy.zip instance admin

  • 4 Posts
  • 125 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 12th, 2023

help-circle






  • Not voting for a candidate who is tacitly supporting a genocide on that basis is not “doing bad things” no matter how much bad faith spin you try to add. The candidate has to earn the vote and that applies to non-voters too. Some people care about certain issues enough to abstain from voting on that basis and others vote strategically because its not a team sport. You just want validation for your own voting decision by implying those abstaining from voting are directly or indirectly responsible for your candidate’s opponent winning which they are not. If Harris wins or loses it will be based on her and her party’s policy and campaign decisions.










  • Sami@lemmy.ziptoWorld News@lemmy.worldMedia Bias Fact Check - Automation
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/radio-free-asia/

    This what scores you high credibility: “a less direct propaganda approach” for state sponsored media that is not critical of its sponsor

    https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/al-jazeera/

    And this is what scores you mixed credibility: “exhibits significant bias against Israel” for state sponsored media that is not critical of its sponsor (updated in Oct 2023 naturally)

    Now every article published by Radio Free Asia is deemed more credible than those published by Al Jazeera despite the former literally being called a former propaganda arm of the state in their own assessment. Yes, good is not the enemy of perfect but this is clearly an ideological decision in both instances.

    CNN also scores as Mostly Factual based on “due to two failed fact checks in the last five years” one being a single reporter’s statement and the other being about Greenland’s ice sheets. That doesn’t seem like a fair assessment to me

    https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/left/cnn-bias/

    So based on this I am supposed to conclude that Radio Free Asia is the most credible source out of the three at a glance.


  • Yeah, I’m not saying all their work is worthless and I know they’re good enough for the most extreme sources of misinformation but to paint entire publications as not reliable based on the assessment of couple laypeople with an inherently narrow worldview (at least a very American-centric one) is the opposite of avoiding bias in my opinion.



  • Sami@lemmy.ziptoWorld News@lemmy.worldMedia Bias Fact Check - Automation
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    2 months ago

    I’m not talking about their source of funding but their qualifications in making claims with such broad implications. It looks like the pet project of some guy and couple faceless names who do not even claim any meaningful professional or academic experience.

    Here’s an example from your link:

    Jim resides in Shreveport, Louisiana with his two boys and is currently working toward pursuing a degree in Psychology/Addiction. Jim is a registered independent voter that tends to lean conservative on most issues.