Is Rolovich finally in our rear view mirror forever

[UberCougars]

Fvuckerberg just fired all his little fact checkers.

He’s been on quite a PR campaign explaining why.

I’m here to help a fellow Coug in your time of need, Willie. Need links?

Go Cougs!

 

[KRUSTYtheCOUG]

Who does most of the "fact checking"? The mainstream media. And what are the vast majority of the members of the MSM? They are liberal. As a group, they are biased, they lean left. Check out the Allsides bias chart at the link provided. Note that one of my most preferred web sites, realclearpolitics.con, is right in the middle. Meanwhile, check out where the biggest media brands, the "most trusted" organizations, the most listened to/watched outfits are-CNN, AP, NYT, Snopes, WaPo, NPR, USA Today......all on the left. They will twist the interpretation to fit the preferred narrative.

Allsides also has a good article about 6 ways that fact checkers are biased, link is below. Very interesting, and generally supports things I have observed from the "fact checkers" over the years. In addition to their 6 identified methods, another one I have seen used vs Trump to pile on the total number of "lies" from him is to take a statement from him that is clearly an opinion and label it as a lie. Obviously a poor methodology. One big example of fact checking bias is how they called the claim false that Obamacare would cause people to lose their doctor. Of course, when it actually started happening Obama was awarded the "Lie of the Year" for saying that people would NOT lost their doctors.

I did a search on "Biggest fact checker mistakes" and there was a big list, of course. So for kicks I decided to go to the one from everyone's favorite source, Fox News, since I hadn't been to their site for a while. Of course, if the thought of going to that site for information makes you nauseous, the list of responses includes ABC, CBS, The Telegraph, and others.


https://www.allsides.com/media-bias/fact-check-bias-chart

https://www.allsides.com/blog/6-ways-fact-checkers-are-biased

The 10 worst fact checks of 2021, and why they matter

2021 marked another year of brazenly slanted media coverage, and the "fact-checking," industry, who've long cast themselves as impartial arbiters of truth, was no exception.

www.foxnews.com

That seems to be an additional good source for evaluating, stretch, thanks! I also like mediabiasfactcheck. A good test on both of these is to test various platforms into their search engine. Their evaluations sure seem to be fair and accurate.

With aggregate sites such as RealClearPolitics it does depend on WHAT you choose to read there as to whether you are getting bias in the stories. But at least they collect a broad perspective and options to read. Taihtsat

 

[Stretch 74]

That seems to be an additional good source for evaluating, stretch, thanks! I also like mediabiasfactcheck. A good test on both of these is to test various platforms into their search engine. Their evaluations sure seem to be fair and accurate.

With aggregate sites such as RealClearPolitics it does depend on WHAT you choose to read there as to whether you are getting bias in the stories. But at least they collect a broad perspective and options to read. Taihtsat

I will have to check out your site also. Thanks.

You certainly are correct about the aggregator sites. It should be obvious, and I am aware of that, but I am sure that many folks are not. A lot of the articles are obvious with a slant/bias just from the title, or from the platform hosting the article/author. I will freely admit that I do read more of the conservative articles than the liberal ones, but it is probably a 60/40 or 65/35 ratio, not 90/10. It IS interesting to read the ones that are a Point/Counterpoint pair.

 

[95coug]

That seems to be an additional good source for evaluating, stretch, thanks! I also like mediabiasfactcheck. A good test on both of these is to test various platforms into their search engine. Their evaluations sure seem to be fair and accurate.

With aggregate sites such as RealClearPolitics it does depend on WHAT you choose to read there as to whether you are getting bias in the stories. But at least they collect a broad perspective and options to read. Taihtsat

I’ve also liked the one you see here: link
It includes not only the political lean, but also a gauge of how much of their reporting is actually factual.

I don’t follow any of them religiously though, each of the ratings charts has its own lean. I’ll read a range of stuff - some of them just for laughs.

It’s worth noting that Facebook and Twitter are not shown…because they’re not news.

 

[KRUSTYtheCOUG]

I’ve also liked the one you see here: link
It includes not only the political lean, but also a gauge of how much of their reporting is actually factual.

I don’t follow any of them religiously though, each of the ratings charts has its own lean. I’ll read a range of stuff - some of them just for laughs.

It’s worth noting that Facebook and Twitter are not shown…because they’re not news.

Looks fair to me although I didn't see the Epoch Times. They must have off the grid entirely to the right.

A healthy news diet should be like an actual diet. Stay primarily away from non-nutritional groups and consume a varied diet that is informationally nutritious and helpful. Taihtsat

 

[95coug]

Looks fair to me although I didn't see the Epoch Times. They must have off the grid entirely to the right.

A healthy news diet should be like an actual diet. Stay primarily away from non-nutritional groups and consume a varied diet that is informationally nutritious and helpful. Taihtsat

Yes, stay away from junk food. Physically and mentally.