Journalism,.....is changing
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In | RSS Feed
 palace_in_frogland  In a broken dream 26 Feb 19 8.52am |
  |
|---|---|
|
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 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.
The left wing Canary Media scored more highly than either the Daily Mail, The Express or the Telegraph: 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 a moderator to this post |
  |
chris123  hove actually 26 Feb 19 9.38am |
|
|---|---|
|
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 a moderator to this post |
|
| W12 26 Feb 19 4.23pm | |
|---|---|
|
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?
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 a moderator to this post |
|
| deleted user 26 Feb 19 4.40pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by W12
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.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 26 Feb 19 4.48pm |
 |
|---|---|
|
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.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / Register
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2023 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.