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

Nine States Face Economic Contraction, Most Since 2009 Crisis

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 108 posts

Re: Nine States Face Economic Contraction, Most Since 2009 Crisis

#51

Post by Fjolsvith »

TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #46
rjtavares wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, I assume all media outlets have ulterior motives behind each article (ranging from the simple "catering to their specific audience with facts supporting their view" to more nefarious "willfully manipulating the people with falsehoods").

Outlets also don't need ulterior motives to produce biased output. If most of your staff hold a conservative outlook, they'll naturally be more skeptical of non-conservative viewpoints in their reporting etc.

Healthy skepticism is a feature of conservatism.

Re: Nine States Face Economic Contraction, Most Since 2009 Crisis

#52

Post by halbritt »

Fjolsvith wrote: post #51
TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Outlets also don't need ulterior motives to produce biased output. If most of your staff hold a conservative outlook, they'll naturally be more skeptical of non-conservative viewpoints in their reporting etc.

Healthy skepticism is a feature of conservatism.

That explains Fox news so clearly.

Re: Nine States Face Economic Contraction, Most Since 2009 Crisis

#53

Post by romaaeterna »

troydavis wrote: post #17
wozniacki wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Billionaire presidential candidate Mike Bloomberg is refusing to buckle under pressure and change the rules of engagement for his news outlet's political reporters—who are forbidden from investigating him or any other Democratic White House hopeful. Bloomberg News journalists will 'just have to learn to live with some things,' he told CBS News in an interview that aired Friday morning. 'They get a paycheck,' the form…

Here are other, much more nuanced analyses of this decision: * Factual summary: https://www.npr.org/2019/11/25/782732936/bloomberg-news-says... * Opinionated: https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/473542-bloomberg-report... , https://www.cjr.org/the_media_today/michael_bloomberg_news_p... (Daily Mail is widely considered a poor source, and while they do report some actual news, their analysis of anything is not worth…

The URL on Daily Mail that you cite has "factcheck" in the domain name and calls itself "The Most Comprehensive Media Bias Resource". It has no about page and is exactly the sort of URL that I'd expect to get emailed from my impressionable 78-year-old mother.

Re: Nine States Face Economic Contraction, Most Since 2009 Crisis

#54

Post by deith »

rjsw wrote: post #40
alamaslah wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet you have not linked to the mediabiasfact site's profile of the sources you provided...That is an example of bias. Are you going to answer my question? Ps. This is a new account. I've been here 11 years and I have noticed those that cite the guidelines are often trying to hide behind them. Also, your own positions are depending upon assuming bad faith.

The Daily Mail is not a newspaper of record.

If you took a newspaper "of record" like the NYT and judged it for what they published the last 10 years, I wonder if you could consider it a newspaper "of record" anymore

Re: Nine States Face Economic Contraction, Most Since 2009 Crisis

#55

Post by starfallg »

russler23 wrote: post #30
troydavis wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least in my case, I downvoted it because it cited Daily Mail as a reliable source. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daily_Mail and https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/daily-mail/ have more, but basically, it’s a tabloid. Their assessment of the decision is incomplete, probably because reporting is not how they differentiate. Here’s a few other entities' explanations of Bloomberg’s decision: https://www.npr.org/2019/11/25/…

Of the four sources posted, only the Mail did the work of getting quotes from Bloomberg reporters. That alone gives it more credibility on this story. The other sources have to editorialize, because they don’t contain original reporting. (NPR features some hot takes from uninvolved parties, which is what reporters do when they can’t get a direct quote.) The Daily Mail has the best reporting on this story.

>only the Mail did the work of getting quotes from Bloomberg reporters. That alone gives it more credibility on this story.

Which in no way indicates it has more credibility. Just that it reportedly spent more resources on this story.

Re: Nine States Face Economic Contraction, Most Since 2009 Crisis

#56

Post by endorphone »

Why is every single reply thus far head in the sand, fingers in the ears denialism? This is a report that simply repeats what the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia predicts.

The US economy is cyclical, and it's had a very good boom cycle (which was sweetened by QE, historically low interest rates, AND a trillion dollar deficit, all absolutely incredible during full-employment and full-growth. The US is now at a point where during a downturn it has few tools left to do anything to respond to a slowing of the economy, and where that trillion dollar deficit is going to look really foolish in retrospect)

The whole "fake news!" retort to everything on here has grown incredibly depressing, and profoundly self-defeating. Short of legitimate evidence to the contrary, it should be immediately shouted down

Re: Nine States Face Economic Contraction, Most Since 2009 Crisis

#58

Post by smileysteve »

Dirlewanger wrote: post #35
rjtavares wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, I assume all media outlets have ulterior motives behind each article (ranging from the simple "catering to their specific audience with facts supporting their view" to more nefarious "willfully manipulating the people with falsehoods").

A good start would be to ban wholesale both Bloomberg and Washington Post articles from HN. Nothing from those publications should be trusted.

> and Washington Post

Is Jeff Bezos running for Political office too?

You just moved the line from running for Presidential party nomination, skipped over mayor of major city, and jumped right to billionaires.

Add on; If all of a sudden you can't be wealthy and own (part of?) a media company, it really hurts the quality of journalism; you'd be left with small town or independent blogs; more susceptible to fake news -- and, more concerning, fear of publishing.

Re: Nine States Face Economic Contraction, Most Since 2009 Crisis

#59

Post by KoftaBob »

ian-bateman wrote: post #26
wozniacki wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Billionaire presidential candidate Mike Bloomberg is refusing to buckle under pressure and change the rules of engagement for his news outlet's political reporters—who are forbidden from investigating him or any other Democratic White House hopeful. Bloomberg News journalists will 'just have to learn to live with some things,' he told CBS News in an interview that aired Friday morning. 'They get a paycheck,' the form…

Interesting that Bloomberg is missing from his own billionaire index list: https://www.bloomberg.com/billionaires/

Very odd...

Re: Nine States Face Economic Contraction, Most Since 2009 Crisis

#60

Post by troydavis »

romaaeterna wrote: post #53
troydavis wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here are other, much more nuanced analyses of this decision: * Factual summary: https://www.npr.org/2019/11/25/782732936/bloomberg-news-says... * Opinionated: https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/473542-bloomberg-report... , https://www.cjr.org/the_media_today/michael_bloomberg_news_p... (Daily Mail is widely considered a poor source, and while they do report some actual news, their analysis of anything is not worth…

The URL on Daily Mail that you cite has "factcheck" in the domain name and calls itself "The Most Comprehensive Media Bias Resource". It has no about page and is exactly the sort of URL that I'd expect to get emailed from my impressionable 78-year-old mother.

Fair point. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/feb/08/wikipedia... is probably a better summary of how Daily Mail is perceived.

Wikipedia prohibits its use as a source, explaining: "volunteer editors on English Wikipedia have come to a consensus that the Daily Mail is ‘generally unreliable and its use as a reference is to be generally prohibited, especially when other more reliable sources exist.’"

They cited "the Daily Mail’s reputation for poor fact checking, sensationalism and flat-out fabrication."

Post reply on HN