You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Journalism,.....is changing
May 21 2019 10.47pm

Journalism,.....is changing

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 2 of 2 « First< 1 2

 

View palace_in_frogland's Profile palace_in_frogland Flag In a broken dream 26 Feb 19 8.52am Send a Private Message to palace_in_frogland Add palace_in_frogland as a friend

Originally posted by Bert the Head

I stumbled across a webside called Media Bias/Fact check. [Link]

The site says that "Media Bias/Fact Check (MBFC News), founded in 2015, is an independent online media outlet. MBFC News is dedicated to educating the public on media bias and deceptive news practices.

MBFC News’ aim is to inspire action and a rejection of overtly biased media. We want to return to an era of straight forward news reporting."

It rated the Daily Mail under `Questionable Sources', with the following rating:

Overall, we rate Daily Mail Questionable due to numerous failed fact checks and poor sourcing of information.

Detailed Report
Reasoning: Right, Propaganda, Conspiracy, Some Fake News

The Daily Telegraph:

Overall, we rate the The Telegraph Right Biased based on story selection that strongly favors the right and Mixed for factual reporting due to poor sourcing of information and some failed fact checks.

The Daily Express

Overall, we rate the Daily Express Right Biased based on editorial content and Mixed for factual reporting due to publishing conspiracies & pseudoscience as well as a few failed fact checks.


Only the Financial Times was rated in the Least Bias category with "Factual Reporting: HIGH"

The left wing Canary Media scored more highly than either the Daily Mail, The Express or the Telegraph:
"Overall, we rate The Canary Left biased based on story selection that typically favors the left and High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing and a clean fact check record"

News outlets are meant to be a source of information but they have deteriorated into a disinformation system.

I read Flat Earth News a few years ago that describes how the media now is spoon fed by press briefings and lacks the will or resources for proper journalism.

I find Media Lens (http://www.medialens.org/) a good site. But it is left of centre and has a very dim view of the mainstream media.

And how do we check for lack of bias in the site that is assessing bias in others?

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View chris123's Profile chris123 Flag hove actually 26 Feb 19 9.38am Send a Private Message to chris123 Add chris123 as a friend

I'm not really bothered by bias, I just like things to be well written. I moved from the Daily Telegraph to the Times a few years ago mainly because the sport reporting was better.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View W12's Profile W12 Flag 26 Feb 19 4.23pm Send a Private Message to W12 Add W12 as a friend

Originally posted by palace_in_frogland

And how do we check for lack of bias in the site that is assessing bias in others?

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?


Anyone can set themselves up a fact checking website:

MediaBIasFactCheck.com describes itself as “the most comprehensive media bias resource in the Internet.” The site is owned by Dave Van Zandt from North Carolina, who offers no biographical information about himself aside from the following: “Dave has been freelancing for 25+ years for a variety of print and web mediums (sic), with a focus on media bias and the role of media in politics. Dave is a registered Non-Affiliated voter who values evidence based reporting” and, “Dave Van Zandt obtained a Communications Degree before pursuing a higher degree in the sciences. Dave currently works full time in the health care industry. Dave has spent more than 20 years as an arm chair researcher on media bias and its role in political influence.”

WND was unable to locate a single article with Van Zandt’s byline. Ironically, the “fact checker” fails to establish his own credibility by disclosing his qualifications and training in evaluating news sources.

Asked for information concerning his expertise in the field of journalism and evaluating news sources, Van Zandt told WND: “I am not a journalist and just a person who is interested in how media bias impacts politics. You will find zero claims of expertise on the website.”

Concerning his purported “25+ years” of experience writing for print and web media, he said: “I am not sure why the 25+ years is still on the website. That was removed a year ago when I first started the website. All of the writing I did was small print news zines from the ’90s. I felt that what I wrote in the ’90s is not related to what I am doing today so I removed it. Again, I am not a journalist. I simply have a background in communications and more importantly science where I learned to value evidence over all else. Through this I also became interested in research of all kinds, especially media bias, which is difficult to measure and is subjective to a degree.

Read more at [Link]

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View dollardays's Profile dollardays Flag 26 Feb 19 4.40pm Send a Private Message to dollardays Add dollardays as a friend

Originally posted by W12


Anyone can set themselves up a fact checking website:

MediaBIasFactCheck.com describes itself as “the most comprehensive media bias resource in the Internet.” The site is owned by Dave Van Zandt from North Carolina, who offers no biographical information about himself aside from the following: “Dave has been freelancing for 25+ years for a variety of print and web mediums (sic), with a focus on media bias and the role of media in politics. Dave is a registered Non-Affiliated voter who values evidence based reporting” and, “Dave Van Zandt obtained a Communications Degree before pursuing a higher degree in the sciences. Dave currently works full time in the health care industry. Dave has spent more than 20 years as an arm chair researcher on media bias and its role in political influence.”

WND was unable to locate a single article with Van Zandt’s byline. Ironically, the “fact checker” fails to establish his own credibility by disclosing his qualifications and training in evaluating news sources.

Asked for information concerning his expertise in the field of journalism and evaluating news sources, Van Zandt told WND: “I am not a journalist and just a person who is interested in how media bias impacts politics. You will find zero claims of expertise on the website.”

Concerning his purported “25+ years” of experience writing for print and web media, he said: “I am not sure why the 25+ years is still on the website. That was removed a year ago when I first started the website. All of the writing I did was small print news zines from the ’90s. I felt that what I wrote in the ’90s is not related to what I am doing today so I removed it. Again, I am not a journalist. I simply have a background in communications and more importantly science where I learned to value evidence over all else. Through this I also became interested in research of all kinds, especially media bias, which is difficult to measure and is subjective to a degree.

Read more at [Link]

It's perfectly valid to ask 'who checks the fact checkers' and if this guy is just some chump winging it in a basement, it's good that any website would point that out. That said, in the wider conversation about the quality of journalism, lets also add that WND is well known for being a loose on facts fringe, conspiracy theory peddling website in its own right.


Edited by dollardays (26 Feb 2019 4.42pm)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Flag Wisbech, England 26 Feb 19 4.48pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

There is no such thing as true objectivity.

As a rather important person once said, history is written by the winners......At the end of the day, as the Frankfurt school correctly taught.....there is only power.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 2 of 2 « First< 1 2

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Journalism,.....is changing