Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Anyone interested in building tools for showing bias in news?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 163 posts

Re: Ask HN: Anyone interested in building tools for showing bias in news?

#71

Post by lj3 »

harigov wrote: post #69
lj3 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a dangerous idea. You seem convinced that you're right and other people are wrong. So much so that you want to force this idea of right and wrong on people by installing it in their browser by default?! This smacks of soviet era re-education. > maybe we can convince the browser developers to include it in their default installation. Any browser that decided to do this would quickly find themselves out of busin…

I am not sure if we are talking about the same thing. I am not talking about right and wrong. I am talking about someone's opinion and alternate opinions.

It's the "let's add it to the browser by default" part I have an issue with. If people want to be able to see alternate opinions easily, they'll install it on their own. If they don't, no amount of forcing it on them will get them to consider alternate opinions. It'll just piss them off.

Re: Ask HN: Anyone interested in building tools for showing bias in news?

#72

Post by splawn »

mtberatwork wrote: post #44
michaelbuckbee wrote: post #37

I'm concerned that your frame for this might be off as I don't think the "filter bubble" is rational opposing viewpoints around a particular topic so much as there just being so much misinformation and plain weirdness out there. There's a saying about it being 10x harder to refute bullshit than it is to spew it. How do we in the information and technology wing of society build tools to deal with that? Alex Jones had…

Indeed, if we do not agree to a common set of facts and a shared reality, how then do we proceed with any kind of meaningful debate? To paint a basic picture, how do you debate the feasibility and merits of sending humans to Mars with a person who denies the moon landings? You might say these are extreme cases, but with the rise and "normalization" of Alex Jones-type media outlets, this will only get worse.

Exactly, when it comes to reality not everybody gets a trophy. Critical thinking and science are waaaay undervalued in our culture.

Re: Ask HN: Anyone interested in building tools for showing bias in news?

#73

Post by thesimpsons1022 »

harigov wrote: post #26
huevosabio wrote: post #14

I would be interested (I was pondering on the same idea), how should we proceed?

I'll keep track of all the people who respond to this thread and contact them through PM. Expect a message from me with more details.

contact me plz

Re: Ask HN: Anyone interested in building tools for showing bias in news?

#74

Post by hga »

michaelbuckbee wrote: post #37

I'm concerned that your frame for this might be off as I don't think the "filter bubble" is rational opposing viewpoints around a particular topic so much as there just being so much misinformation and plain weirdness out there. There's a saying about it being 10x harder to refute bullshit than it is to spew it. How do we in the information and technology wing of society build tools to deal with that? Alex Jones had…

As an Alt Right Trump supporter, I can state without question that the worst thing about 2016 politics so far is that Alex Jones and his InfoWars no longer earns automatic dismissal, i.e. he's been publishing some good stuff, therefore people I follow have been linking more to him, etc.

What that says is not specifically clear to me, but it's nothing good, unless he's become significantly more sane as of late.

Re: Ask HN: Anyone interested in building tools for showing bias in news?

#77

Post by hga »

harigov wrote: post #11
return0 wrote: post #9

I think the tool you need is "skepticism". Teach people to not rush to ascribe labels to everything they don't like, and to stop ignoring anything that has been labeled as X-ist by their bubble. Teach people to not think with slogans and hashtags or listen to celebrities.

Well, that may work but you also need to have intellectual resources to be able to process all the information and see something for what it really is. Also, people serving news are upping the game by using the latest in psychology research to influence us. We need _somebody_ on our side.

As Upton Sinclair said, "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding"

For a whole bunch of people, letting letting your peers know you hold right of center beliefs is career ending.

Those intellectual resources, well, are we rational beings, or rationalizing beings? Long experience suggests to me the bulk of people are the latter, and higher intelligence often just means being better at those rationalizations.

Also, people serving news are upping the game by using the latest in psychology research to influence us.

You're referring to that field of "science" that's going through a grave confirmation crisis right now? You might say the latest research in the field is that their body of research is suspect....

Re: Ask HN: Anyone interested in building tools for showing bias in news?

#78

Post by jellicle »

return0 wrote: post #9

I think the tool you need is "skepticism". Teach people to not rush to ascribe labels to everything they don't like, and to stop ignoring anything that has been labeled as X-ist by their bubble. Teach people to not think with slogans and hashtags or listen to celebrities.

You turn on the TV. It tells you something. You turn on the radio. It tells you something. You turn on the internet. It tells you something. Should you be skeptical of it when all your sources of information agree that this is a real fact?

What if the fact is "there will be an eclipse next week"? What if the fact is "Hillary killed Vince Foster"?

The difference between the two facts above is that many more media outlets will report about the second one; there's lots more confirmation available for that one.

Re: Ask HN: Anyone interested in building tools for showing bias in news?

#79

Post by cableshaft »

hga wrote: post #74
michaelbuckbee wrote: post #37

I'm concerned that your frame for this might be off as I don't think the "filter bubble" is rational opposing viewpoints around a particular topic so much as there just being so much misinformation and plain weirdness out there. There's a saying about it being 10x harder to refute bullshit than it is to spew it. How do we in the information and technology wing of society build tools to deal with that? Alex Jones had…

As an Alt Right Trump supporter, I can state without question that the worst thing about 2016 politics so far is that Alex Jones and his InfoWars no longer earns automatic dismissal, i.e. he's been publishing some good stuff, therefore people I follow have been linking more to him, etc. What that says is not specifically clear to me, but it's nothing good, unless he's become significantly more sane as of late.

What makes someone Alt Right, if I might ask? I've only heard about it via Facebook and it's being painted as fringe extremist stuff there, but absolutely everyone is crazy on Facebook right now. I'd rather hear it from someone who considers themselves part of it.

Re: Ask HN: Anyone interested in building tools for showing bias in news?

#80

Post by blipblop »

mtberatwork wrote: post #44
michaelbuckbee wrote: post #37

I'm concerned that your frame for this might be off as I don't think the "filter bubble" is rational opposing viewpoints around a particular topic so much as there just being so much misinformation and plain weirdness out there. There's a saying about it being 10x harder to refute bullshit than it is to spew it. How do we in the information and technology wing of society build tools to deal with that? Alex Jones had…

Indeed, if we do not agree to a common set of facts and a shared reality, how then do we proceed with any kind of meaningful debate? To paint a basic picture, how do you debate the feasibility and merits of sending humans to Mars with a person who denies the moon landings? You might say these are extreme cases, but with the rise and "normalization" of Alex Jones-type media outlets, this will only get worse.

I think the key to solving this is to "branch" off the arguments that depend on a contentious topic such as "denying moon landings".

So instead of having to prove moon landings don't exist, there would be one branch that denies moon landings, and the other that accepts moon landings.

This modularises/encapsulates different reasoning chains allowing each to be debating on their own. So whether moon landings occurred could be argued on its own.

The problem today is the "common set of facts and shared reality" that the two sides of politics share are very separated.

Post reply on HN