1. Things you need to know about the new ‘Conversations’ PM system:

    a) DO NOT REPLY TO THE NOTIFICATION EMAIL! I get them, not the intended recipient. I get a lot of them and I do not want them! It is just a notification, log into the site and reply from there.

    b) To delete old conversations use the ‘Leave conversation’ option. This is just delete by another name.
    Dismiss Notice

Here is the news ...

Discussion in 'off topic' started by Still, Jul 11, 2019.

  1. Seeker_UK

    Seeker_UK Waiting for the streetcar..

    I like the project and I've had a quick read through the methodology. I can see that the y axis is the less subjective and probably the less controversial of the two.

    The bit I have trouble with is the objectivity of the x-axis. The author has done a lot to try and make it objective but if one of her metrics is comparison to position of known politicians, that is itself set by subjectivity and bias; it is unclear how that is compensated. I also couldn't see the makeup of her reviewers in terms of gender, age, socieconomic, political or geographical etc so, again, the idea of having assessment made on each piece by multiple readers is a practice but no evidence that they're a genuinely diverse set.

    I also couldn't find the phrase 'peer review' anywhere. Hopefully comments from site readers go some way to this but is on no way a perfect substitute.
     
    Still likes this.
  2. Still

    Still he said his naim was ralph

    I heartily agree Seeker, and apologise b/c didn't mean to suggest it is anything like perfect.
    But iiuc it is a useful tool re: the mission to comprehend wtf is going on.
     
  3. Seeker_UK

    Seeker_UK Waiting for the streetcar..

    It's a method that has huge merit - I wholeheartedly support anything that tries to add a voice of reason and sanity into the debate.

    In the world of human sciences, nothing's perfect but a few tweaks to reduce the risk of anyone claiming it has not done enough to compensate for bias / partisanship.
     
    Still likes this.
  4. richgilb

    richgilb Admonishtrator

    Hmm, well for me I only really bother with The I and the BBC. Admittedly the I is different to the Independent

    I am fairly sure The I is well regarded, if the Independent is less so these days.
     
  5. richgilb

    richgilb Admonishtrator

    Whatever.
     
  6. richgilb

    richgilb Admonishtrator

    See #25
     
  7. Still

    Still he said his naim was ralph

    A sources of information related epiphany is *that* close.
     
  8. Joe Hutch

    Joe Hutch Mate of the bloke

    And where's the Sunday Post? An unbiased source (of folksy humour and advice on where to source tartan wool) if ever I saw one, yet completely neglected by these so-called 'experts'! Crivvens, and help ma boab!
     
  9. Still

    Still he said his naim was ralph

    Presumably the Sunday Post is currently in your magazine rack.
     
  10. Joe Hutch

    Joe Hutch Mate of the bloke

    Aye, along with my collection of People's Friend.
     
    cctaylor likes this.
  11. Still

    Still he said his naim was ralph

    I have always admired you for being an ally to feminists.
     
  12. Seanm

    Seanm pfm Member

    Think about it more, it really is very odd to include "analysis" on a sliding scale of overall quality, and to evaluate the presence of analysis as constituting a diminishment of quality. I'm not really sure what the inclusion of publications that trade almost entirely in analysis is supposed to accomplish, given this decision. And then this reliance on very woolly concepts like "unfair" and "extreme", especially as equivalents for explicit political commitment - not good: Jacobin, for instance, has clear left wing values, but in what sense does that make it unfair? The aversion to both analysis and explicit political commitment does tend to favour the idea of journalist as stenographer - which naturally favours established values and power relations.

    Were I to do a chart of media-mapping paradigms, this would very far to the right on the x axis (critical to liberal pluralist) and about in the middle of the y axis (good to complete sh*te).
    That's what I'm confused about: many of the titles here deal almost exclusively in the latter. If that's not what it's measuring, why are they there?
     
  13. eternumviti

    eternumviti pfm Member

    If it is news, then it is news: neutral. If the news is factually wrong or biased, then it reflects either laziness, or opinion.

    So if this chart only evaluates news, not opinion/bias, then all we are looking at is whether the organs involved employ either fastidious or lazy journalists.
     
  14. Still

    Still he said his naim was ralph

    The quality in question is factual reporting v some/lots/all BS, analysis, etc
    The former is/should be factual. The later is an amount of falsehoods, or opinion so can't really be factual.

    istm to assist those who have yet to compered the difference between reporting of news (should be facts) and op/ed pieces.

    I believe this is also about factual reporting.
    To help us understand how 'factual news reporting' and 'neutral' service X is.
    Of course even the most neutral/factual services have their biases and blind spots, which is part what I hope we will cover in this thread.

    Would you like me to start with t'BBC? :=)

    Because far too many people use them apparently assuming they are providing unbiased factual information.
    iiuc the chart is designed to be relevant to as many misinformed people as possible.

    In principle absolutely, in practice obviously not.

    You still haven't comprehended the chart. Many of the orgs evaluated present biased opinion as fact.
     
    jackbarron likes this.
  15. eternumviti

    eternumviti pfm Member

    Which takes me all the way back to my original question. Why are the BBC, the FT and The Guardian shown as neutral?
     
  16. Still

    Still he said his naim was ralph

    To understand the answer you would need to comprehend the vectors, Victor.
    Would you like some assistance?
     
  17. eternumviti

    eternumviti pfm Member

    No thanks, I'm losing the will to live.
     
  18. Still

    Still he said his naim was ralph

    My work here is done ;-)
     
    kendo likes this.
  19. Martyn Miles

    Martyn Miles pfm Member

    I’ll stick with John Humphreys and the ‘Today’ programme...
     
  20. Still

    Still he said his naim was ralph

    Community Advisory

    The past performance of news/information sources is not necessarily a guide to future performance.
    The quality of news/information sources may go down as well as up.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice