submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by to c/news@lemmy.world
 

Hello World, As many of you have probably noticed, there is a growing problem on the internet when it comes to undisclosed bias in both amateur and professional reporting. While not every outlet can be like the C-SPAN, or Reuters, we also believe that it's impossible to remove the human element from the news, especially when it concerns, well, humans.

To this end, we've created a media bias bot, which we hope will keep everyone informed about WHO, not just the WHAT of posted articles. This bot uses Media Bias/Fact Check to add a simple reply to show bias. We feel this is especially important with the US Election coming up. The bot will also provide links to Ground.News, as well, which we feel is a great source to determine the WHOLE coverage of a given article and/or topic.

As always feedback is welcome, as this is a active project which we really hope will benefit the community.

Thanks!

FHF / LemmyWorld Admin team 💖

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 39 points 2 years ago (9 children)

Does this consider the bias of who runs MBFC?

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • load more comments (9 replies)
    [–] 29 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

    This is a bad bot using bad reasoning and it's only going to hurt the state of discourse. You're not countering dishonesty, you're encouraging it.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Can you provide some examples? Is Media Bias problematic or just this bot and how so?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 19 points 2 years ago*

    I'm just gonna drop this here as an example:

    The Jerusalem Report (Owned by Jerusalem Post) and the Jerusalem Post

    This biased as shit publication is declared by MBFC as VEEEERY slightly center-right. They make almost no mention of the fact that they cherry pick aspects of the Israel war to highlight, provide only the most favorable context imaginable, yadda yadda. By no stretch of the imagination would these publications be considered unbiased as sources, yet according to MBFC they're near perfect.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 28 points 2 years ago* (5 children)

    After seeing the comment on a few posts, the length is really bothering me. I don't want to block the bot since it's useful information. What about a single line of text with a link to "read more"?

    Example with explanations:

    404 Media is rated with High Creditability by Media Bias Fact Check. (change Media Bias Fact Check to a link that goes to a post explaining what they do, the reason for the bot, and a link to their donation page)

    Check the bias and credibility of this article on ground.news. (change "this article" to be a link instead of displaying link in plain text)

    How it might look:

    404 Media is rated with High Creditability by Media Bias Fact Check.

    Check the bias and credibility of this article on ground.news.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (4 replies)
    [–] 23 points 2 years ago

    I think this is so stupid.

    I swear it's a "centrist" libertarian idealism that you are gonna find all the biases of the publication so that you feel superior for not falling for any of them.

    To a degree things should make you feel an emotional response and to not and think yourself better for not, makes you falsely superior.

    I get it for making sure that propaganda isn't posted but that's more of what general community moderation is for is it not?

    I dunno, I definitely don't think it should be so prominent. I barely think it's needed. Maybe people could call to the bot to check for them? But putting privately decided political leaning on every post just seems like needless segregation that allows for people to immediately ignore that and the conversation that can be had from it.

  • source
  • [–] 22 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

    Putting some site in charge of determining what news is valid just means that site controls the bias. I like the wide mix that we get now. Partisan commenters are more of a problem than bias in the sources. It's best when there are informed commenters who point out issues. Sometimes we have them, though not always.

  • source
  • [–] 22 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I hate this and have already blocked the bot.

    Comments are obscenely long, and I see no reason to trust your source.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 19 points 2 years ago (5 children)

    I think the bot is crap based on this: The Guardian Media Bias Fact Check Credibility: [Medium]

    The guardian is one of the best newspapers on the planet and published content exposing such as the Panama Papers.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (5 replies)
    [–] 16 points 2 years ago (10 children)

    Very cool. I would also recommend Wikipedia's perennial news list as a source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • load more comments (10 replies)
    [–] 14 points 2 years ago

    Thank you for putting this into place!

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    The "footer" section is very long, and the spoiler tags don't seem to do anything on the Boost app. This makes the bot comment take up an entire screen on mobile.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 9 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    A timely article about why this type of "rating" is a really bad idea:

    The most chilling words today: I’m from NewsGuard and I am here to rate you by Jonathan Turley.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Bot: Hmm this article reflects reality, thus it is biased to the left.

    Using charged language like that constitutes disinformation and is reprehensible. Imagine if viewers started disregarding a source on account of your bot declaring it biased.

    Shameful.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 2 points 2 years ago

    Browsing world after a few weeks:

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›