this post was submitted on 10 Sep 2024
208 points (95.2% liked)

World News

39000 readers
2139 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world -1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

They clearly list the methodology they use on their website.

[–] Aurenkin@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I suggest reading the methodology carefully. Picking a number between 0 and 10 is hardly a robust methodology. Any two people could follow it and come to completely different answers.

[–] ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

There is a whole lot more to it than that. You can read it here.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/methodology/

[–] Aurenkin@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The placement of the yellow dot is determined through a composite score derived from four distinct categories: Biased Wording/Headlines, Factual/ Sourcing, Story Choices, and Political Affiliation. Each category is rated on a scale of 0 to 10, with 0. indicating a lack of bias and 10 representing extreme bias. The average of these four scores is then plotted on the scale to indicate the source's overall Left-Right bias.

I wouldn't call picking four numbers 'a whole lot more ' personally. If you actually read some of the bias analysis it becomes more obvious how arbitrary it is.

[–] ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The rubric is literally right below what you quoted

The categories are as follows:

  1. Biased Wording/Headlines- Does the source use loaded words to convey emotion to sway the reader. Do headlines match the story?

  2. Factual/Sourcing- Does the source report factually and back up claims with well-sourced evidence.

  3. Story Choices: Does the source report news from both sides, or do they only publish one side.

  4. Political Affiliation: How strongly does the source endorse a particular political ideology? Who do the owners support or donate to?

Just because it is a qualitative and not a quantitative assessment doesn't mean it's arbitrary.

[–] Aurenkin@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Yes I agree, and just because there is a methodology doesn't make the result not arbitrary. Can you explain what number four means? How do I assess it, what's a 0, what's a 5 and what's a 10? How does number 2 relate to bias, isn't that a factuality rating thing , why is it in the bias rubric? It's a joke, each rating is totally arbitrary as there is no definition of what each one means beyond some vague description of the category. It's essentially pick a number, feels based.

I have worked with qualitive rubrics before and this one is barely worthy of the name honestly. Two people could take this rubric away and come to completely opposite conclusions based on their own biases.