pipishere Gocked and Evil
Dec 20, 8:50 am
Being "neutral" or "unbiased" is not realistic to the point of being meaningless. Bias is also not inherently harmful. What is most important to me is providing complete details, that are accurate as possible, precisely stated, without deliberate omissions that affect interpretation. It's why I appreciate NPR's reporting, there's of course inherent unavoidable bias in which stories are chosen to publish and tone and such, but the actual reporting of an event tends to be thorough and include the general positions of the main sides on an issue. They don't tend to omit information or outright falsify in order to further a point. And i find it just as important with sources i generally like the leanings of as ones I dont, because I never want to be in the position of insisting on a false point because I'm lacking a complete and accurate picture.
tidford My little piece of heaven
Dec 20, 8:37 am
No, humans are human. But there is a very humongous gap between a reasonable attempt at neutrallity and the profound partisanship practiced on the Left by traditional MSM and on the Right by Fox etc.
To hint, as this poll does, that just because humans are imperfect and will always have some bias, that it is perfectly natural and reasonable for news outlets to be partisan echo chambers aligned to political extremes is wrong and dangerous.
News organizations are made up of multiple individuals. If the vast majority of those individuals come from one side of the political spectrum, then that news organization will NOT represent the nation as a whole, but quite naturally will become an echo chamber magnifying each side's worst instincts. Pure mob psychology.
An honestly balanced newsroom can avoid the destructive mob psychology of the partisan echo chambers that are ripping us apart.
Comments: Add Comment