41–50 of 128 posts
This is a noble goal, but when I clicked on the website a few times (admittedly, only looked at about 10 articles) I ended up with a very "left" view. I do not think it is skewed by personal views -- you could see clearly who is considered evil just from the title. Also, not to knock down the effort, but I think this can cause more outrage, by showing that the other side "is wrong" than grow sanity. Just due to the f…
Hi all, I have the feeling that in the last few years all political discussions have become more extreme. People from the left think that all the people from the right are evil and vice versa. Our filter bubbles don't help with this issue. That's why I built "Their news". With "Their News" you discover news from the entire political spectrum without any filter bubbles. My recommendation is that you try out different…
Reading “their” news makes me scared and angry that people actually read this crap on purpose and presumably agree with much of it. How is that supposed to help pop filter bubbles?
Yes, the politically engaged out group really is like that. They really do hate you.
left/right doesn't make much sense IMHO, it's way too polarizing in itself. you want at least two dimensions, like liberal/authoritarian policies and libertanian/socialist economics. that said i love the 'pick your bias' at the top. hits dead center on target. could even be the title of the service itself.
When leftist media platforms like Facebook ban news about BLM marxist founder buying mansions in white area is this liberal or authoritarian/fascist approach?
Facebook banning content on "their yard" does not hurt anyone because it's their property. Therefore on a spectrum this would be Right - Libertarian.
Conservative on the political spectrum states: Right-wing political ideologies are characterized by conservative views. Since the political compass asks us to isolate the left/right binary for economic preferences, right-wing economic policy often favors reducing taxes, limiting government spending, and fewer government-imposed restrictions on businesses.
Key: "fewer government-imposed restrictions on businesses"
By controlling what Facebook can/can't ban that's imposing a restriction, so the opposite of that makes this right-wing since FB is being allowed to censor whatever they choose.
Libertarian: People that hold a libertarian political identity often focus on the freedom of the individual. They believe that personal freedom should be maximized and they support the idea that government authority and control over their citizens should be displaced.5 Equality is of utmost importance for libertarians.
^ This, except lib/right consider companies/capitalism an extension of citizenship and give them more rights.
The left would probably demand more fairness/equalness since the left-wing side of the political spectrum says:
left-wing economic policy often favors higher taxes for wealthy individuals, stronger regulations for businesses, and government spending on social infrastructure.
So authoritarian/left would demand higher taxes and stronger regulations possibly it would also give the government final say in everything posted on facebook and require facebook to divulge the identity and data of any member it requests data on, court order or not.
As an aside I consider myself libertarian/left - as in I'd like less statist power (weaker federal govt, more freedom for individuals, but more oversight/regulations on businesses and corporations so they can't become countries unto themselves like Amazon and I believe egalitarianism is the most noble pursuit because we have enough resources and science to support everyone on earth - considering everything we waste daily, so why should anyone have to suffer if there's a way for them not to within our means if we just collectively desired that outcome?).
This is a noble goal, but when I clicked on the website a few times (admittedly, only looked at about 10 articles) I ended up with a very "left" view. I do not think it is skewed by personal views -- you could see clearly who is considered evil just from the title. Also, not to knock down the effort, but I think this can cause more outrage, by showing that the other side "is wrong" than grow sanity. Just due to the f…
That is a valid consern. I get the rating info from adfontesmedia, so I do not judge the poltical views of each outlet and what is condisered to be left/center/right. There is no moderation what so ever (that can be a good or bad thing). But the website definelty still contains a few bugs so that might be the issue you are running into. Could you elaborate a bit on your second point. I am not quite sure I fully under…
Hi all, I have the feeling that in the last few years all political discussions have become more extreme. People from the left think that all the people from the right are evil and vice versa. Our filter bubbles don't help with this issue. That's why I built "Their news". With "Their News" you discover news from the entire political spectrum without any filter bubbles. My recommendation is that you try out different…
So you're using outlet/organization level bias ratings to assign bias ratings to individual articles on a specific topic? Can't it vary by topic, author, or even what facts are represented (used, excluded, or wrong)? For example, when I looked at the articles in the middle of the slider, it seemed that they were more of a mix of left and right leaning articles, not necessarily middle ground articles (and seemed to be…
I'm sure they are eventually updated, but making a general judgment per news source to show individual articles means it will occasionally be wrong and misleading for the reader. The name alone, "their news", suggests an us vs. them mentality that we could use less of these days.
For once I think machine learning would be suitable for this. Have something like GPT-3 process individual articles and produce a bias number. I think this is how https://www.improvethenews.org/ works, and at a quick glance, does a much better job at classifying.
But honestly? We shouldn't bother. Consume every new information with a critical mind, and don't expect editorials to do the thinking for you. There are no bias sliders for social media posts, where most information comes from these days, and we need to teach critical thinking instead of picking what we want to agree with or not.
I hoped that this would put side by side articles about the same subjects but with different spins. I find myself comparing breitbart/foxnews/nytimes/guardian quite often.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So you're using outlet/organization level bias ratings to assign bias ratings to individual articles on a specific topic? Can't it vary by topic, author, or even what facts are represented (used, excluded, or wrong)? For example, when I looked at the articles in the middle of the slider, it seemed that they were more of a mix of left and right leaning articles, not necessarily middle ground articles (and seemed to be…
Exactly. The biases are per news source and actually constant: https://github.com/Hadjimina/perspectiveNews/blob/0c4c6a932a... I'm sure they are eventually updated, but making a general judgment per news source to show individual articles means it will occasionally be wrong and misleading for the reader. The name alone, "their news", suggests an us vs. them mentality that we could use less of these days. For once I t…
left/right doesn't make much sense IMHO, it's way too polarizing in itself. you want at least two dimensions, like liberal/authoritarian policies and libertanian/socialist economics. that said i love the 'pick your bias' at the top. hits dead center on target. could even be the title of the service itself.
When leftist media platforms like Facebook ban news about BLM marxist founder buying mansions in white area is this liberal or authoritarian/fascist approach?
Liberalism is a tricky word, because Modern Liberalism or Social Liberalism (or just Liberalism in the USA) are almost the opposite of Classical Liberalism.
The Political Compass avoids the terms and use:
- Authoritarian (Fascism) - Libertarian (Anarchism): from "everything is controlled by a central entity" to "everything is decentralised" - Left (Communism) - Right (Neo-liberalism): from "everything is nationalised", to "everything is provided by the market"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Reading “their” news makes me scared and angry that people actually read this crap on purpose and presumably agree with much of it. How is that supposed to help pop filter bubbles?
That’s what popping a filter bubble feels like. I followed Jacobin and a bunch of other accounts of people I disagree with when I started on Twitter. Learning more about people who hate you, your philosophy, beliefs and identities does not lead to any great improvements in your life so I stopped. Yes, the politically engaged out group really is like that. They really do hate you.
Maybe it's not clear what I have in mind, so I will give an example: the words "people", "you", "they"...what do these words refer to, precisely and explicitly (what entities do they encompass, and what do they not encompass)?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When leftist media platforms like Facebook ban news about BLM marxist founder buying mansions in white area is this liberal or authoritarian/fascist approach?
It'd be libertarian, because libertarians believe that corporations should have the right to do basically whatever they want that doesn't physically infringe on another's own freedoms to do whatever they want. Facebook banning content on "their yard" does not hurt anyone because it's their property. Therefore on a spectrum this would be Right - Libertarian. Conservative on the political spectrum states: Right-wing po…
There is nothing libertarian about censoring someone.
Sure, you have the right to do that, given they're on your private property (on Facebook) but that screams authoritarianism: it's like Facebook is his own little country ruling on his citizens and limiting their freedom.
Now, the act of advocating for Facebook to be able to do what it is currently able to do is libertarian. An authoritarian measure would be, as you mention, regulating Facebook to force them to publish anything or giving exactly the same space / visibility to people of opposing viewpoints.
As an another aside, as an anarcho-capitalist (right libertarian), I've a lot of respect for your political viewpoint - that would be ideal but I think it's unachievable. Egalitarianism - or equality of outcomes - can't happen unless you force it with an authoritarian government or you have perfect people that share voluntarily everything. On top of this, as soon as you have an authoritarian government you'll start having corruption (we don't have perfect people) which will favour government officials over normal people, throwing in the bin your egalitarianism.
Instead of focusing on equality of outcomes, I think we should focus on reaching equality of opportunity; given we have imperfect people we need a system of incentives to keep people broadly aligned with what society wants. Therefore there should be no government (which is outside the market and corruptible) and all services (including protection, healthcare, lawmaking) should be provided by the market. I think this will bring us as close to egalitarianism as we can possibly get.