Visualisation

Jump to navigation Jump to search

People aren't used to seeing really neutral coverage, such as we produce, and consequently sometimes don't recognize it when they see it. Of course, there are also degrees of bias. The usual complaints about the "liberal media" are fair if you take them to mean the mainstream media are honestly pursuing objective reality while holding, and expressing, liberal views. More fringe media (both far-right and far-left) are mostly concerned with promoting their opinions regardless of objective reality (they have an opinion-based rather than fact-based mindset), so that "bias" for those fringe sources is a profoundly more vicious thing, next to which the mainstream media look remarkably even-handed. We do generally achieve greater neutrality than the mainstream by omitting opinion from our coverage, but the mainstream is still vastly more useful than fringe sources.

In this case, it strikes me as naive to suppose that video footage would be unbiased; more likely it'd have radical selection bias compounded with radical interpretation bias.

Pi zero (talk)20:15, 19 November 2020

National Public Radio (NPR) and Public Broadcasting System (PBS) broadcast really neutral coverage. An unedited video of a protest would show a lot of people standing around waiting for something to happen.

NPR generally isn't too bad on neutrality, but of late I'm wary of their accuracy. Note, a video of people standing around waiting for something to happen is not, in itself, very informative.

Pi zero (talk)16:20, 7 December 2020