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

Some Americans are breaking out of political echo chambers

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 964 posts

Re: Some Americans are breaking out of political echo chambers

#361

Post by pmoriarty »

throwawayboise wrote: post #350
boredprograming wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fox New's actual news coverage is mostly truthful. But a huge amount of their airtime is opinion pieces and media personalities who spout BS all day. Tucker Carlson is probably the most notorious. Plus they have Republican politicians calling in and showing up constantly, and they're allowed to say whatever they want.

I mean, the same is true about CNN's opinion pieces, or MSNBC's, etc, they are just on the opposite side of the spectrum.

CNN and MSNBC are not the opposite of Fox News.

The opposite would be something like The Nation or Democracy Now!.

Re: Some Americans are breaking out of political echo chambers

#362

Post by [deleted] »

[deleted] wrote: post #344
ggggtez wrote: post #87

The problem of course is that not every issue needs a "both sides" treatment. Sometimes there are questions of objective facts that reading lies from alternative sources do not actually help you in understanding the truth of the world. The person who desperately tries to cite "50/50" liberal and conservative sources in the article is the worst kind of fence sitter. Sometimes, one side or the other is just wrong, or t…

[deleted]

[deleted]

Re: Some Americans are breaking out of political echo chambers

#363

Post by Moodles »

pmoriarty wrote: post #361
throwawayboise wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, the same is true about CNN's opinion pieces, or MSNBC's, etc, they are just on the opposite side of the spectrum.

CNN and MSNBC are not the opposite of Fox News. The opposite would be something like The Nation or Democracy Now! .

Find one positive article from MSNBC or CNN about Trump during his presidency?

Re: Some Americans are breaking out of political echo chambers

#364

Post by tremon »

takeda wrote: post #339
munificent wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Most non-religious americans are something like Christian Atheists. They don't believe in a god, but their worldview, ethics, and cultural norms are still originating in Christianity. I like latkes and challah, but that doesn't make me Jewish. All groups influence culture and culture influences all individuals. But simply having adopted a piece of culture that came from some group does not make one a member of that…

To add to it, even the Christmas tree doesn't originate from Christianity. It was just adapted from a pagan tradition. The Santa Claus image was created by commercialism. The original saint Claus is celebrating on December 6 (or 7, don't remeber exactly) and that was a priest that anonymously was donating toys to children in orphanages and later was discovered. Easter Bunny is another commercialisation of a Christian…

December 6th: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Nicholas

> Santa Claus evolved from Dutch traditions regarding Saint Nicholas (Sinterklaas). When the Dutch established the colony of New Amsterdam, they brought the legend and traditions of Sinterklaas with them

Re: Some Americans are breaking out of political echo chambers

#365

Post by myfavoritedog »

rejectedandsad wrote: post #272
myfavoritedog wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

to the extent of sympathizing with an attack on the electoral vote count The Left thought it was hilarious when Trump's Secret Service moved him to the bunker when violent protesters were threatening to breach the security of the White House. I remember late night jokes, CNN/MSNBC mocking of how big a coward Trump was, etc. It was a great deal of fun and tied in with the lies about how supposedly Trump had peaceful p…

> the bunker when violent protesters were threatening to breach the security of the White House Yeah because they didn’t and Trump hilariously lied about the incident. Even they weren’t saying “hang Mike Pence” > Hillary Clinton spent years claiming that the election of Trump was illegitimate. She did win the popular vote, while Trump won neither while claiming he did win both…. > They created an environment that was…

I started writing out all the tit-for-tat responses, then I remembered that this topic is about media narrative bubbles.

I already know all of your claims because I watch broadcast news programs here and there. I see the news reports on Good Morning America when we have it on. I know what the left-wing narratives are.

That's my point. It's the default.

You have to work harder to get something that isn't in that bubble.

Re: Some Americans are breaking out of political echo chambers

#366

Post by ErikVandeWater »

vsskanth wrote: post #8

I tried this experiment: read nytimes, wapo, fox, national review and politico. I wanted to get different perspectives. However, I encountered a bunch of issues: They dont talk about or even cover the same things, which makes it hard to compare liberal vs conservative perspectives. This is the most common form of bias I've come across. In the rare case they do cover the same thing, many articles either simply do not…

All the sources you listed are at least somewhat pro-authoritarian. Recommend reason.com to round it out.

Re: Some Americans are breaking out of political echo chambers

#367

Post by bena »

commandlinefan wrote: post #54
benzible wrote: post #42

AllSides buys wholesale into right-wing framing. By what measure is CNN's news coverage on the leftmost side of the spectrum? Is MSNBC really the equivalent of Jacobin or Mother Jones, especially when it devotes 3 hours each morning to center-right Morning Joe? https://www.allsides.com/media-bias/media-bias-ratings

> By what measure is CNN's news coverage on the leftmost side "The latest Trump scandal shows how much we must still discover about his presidency's assault on democracy" "Trump's DOJ continued to pursue a CNN reporter's records even after a federal judge called the reasoning 'unanchored in any facts'" "A senate report reveals new details about the stunning security breakdowns ahead of the January 6 attack but omits…

Here's the problem with your framing: It's not "left-wing" if it's true.

The first. Sure, that's an opinionated take on the facts of the matter. But the facts aren't great either.

The second. Did a federal judge call the reasoning "unanchored in any facts"? If so, then they're just telling you what the judge said. Did the Trump DOJ then continue to pursue those records? If so, then they're just telling you what happened. That headline is devoid of any opinion. And let's not ignore, it's about CNN being the target of the Trump DOJ. If this is indicative of bias, it's bias towards CNN themselves, not any "left-wing agenda".

The third. Did Trump have a role in the security of the D.C. and the Capitol? The headline implies he did. And from what we know, he did have some role. He was responsible for certain things. Now the word "stunning" is a smell. But it's not really forcing you to care about one side or the other. It's just saying that the security breakdown was extremely unexpected. That all being said, did the Senate make a report? Did it reveal new details? Did it not say anything about what the President could have done but didn't?

The fourth. Obama is an former President. His words will be reported on. Did he say those things? It's not bias to say someone said something. It's not bias to report on a former President.

The fifth. Once again. Did that happen? Is that audio of Giuliani calling Ukraine to convince them to investigate Biden? Is the investigation he wants based on anything meaningful?

So of the five headlines you've chosen to demonstrate liberal bias by CNN only the top can be said to be actually biased. And that's mostly in presentation. Being critical of Trump, the Republican party, or "the right" in general isn't "left-wing" by default. Republicans themselves should have been critical of Trump. And they were, right up until he won the nomination.

Fairness isn't tit-for-tat. Not every "right-wing" impropriety must be balanced with a "left-wing" one. That's not fairness. That's sports team mentality.

Fairness is everyone being measured against the same standard.

Re: Some Americans are breaking out of political echo chambers

#368

Post by merpnderp »

vsskanth wrote: post #8

I tried this experiment: read nytimes, wapo, fox, national review and politico. I wanted to get different perspectives. However, I encountered a bunch of issues: They dont talk about or even cover the same things, which makes it hard to compare liberal vs conservative perspectives. This is the most common form of bias I've come across. In the rare case they do cover the same thing, many articles either simply do not…

Modern journalism is about covering the most important stories...

With a pillow...

Until they go away.

Re: Some Americans are breaking out of political echo chambers

#369

Post by JAlexoid »

sudosysgen wrote: post #334
crazygringo wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I highly recommend the Economist . Their articles mostly follow a dialectical format -- thesis, antithesis, synthesis, with about a third of the article spent on each one. I don't know of any other publication whose house style is so rigorous in this. It's also highly editorialized, but very open and transparent about the positions it takes -- any bias they have is in the open, but is in the final synthesis after the…

I don't recommend using the Economist as your only source for international news. It's very deeply ideological in a way that is almost invisible if you can't easily compare it to a known truth. It's certainly not only interested in solutions that can be implemented. It's interested in solutions that enforce the free market, and it paints non-market solutions as infeasible, even though they often work and are implemen…

The Economist is one of the least biased sources of news, that routinely publishes letters, opeds and articles contradicting the sated editorial agenda. Very few other news sources actually do that.

They're not perfect, but it sure beats NYT.

If you want the optimal news coverage without needing to read a million sources - The Economist, Financial Times, WSJ and The Guardian.

Re: Some Americans are breaking out of political echo chambers

#370

Post by liveoneggs »

vsskanth wrote: post #8

I tried this experiment: read nytimes, wapo, fox, national review and politico. I wanted to get different perspectives. However, I encountered a bunch of issues: They dont talk about or even cover the same things, which makes it hard to compare liberal vs conservative perspectives. This is the most common form of bias I've come across. In the rare case they do cover the same thing, many articles either simply do not…

just watch C-SPAN and cut out the crap; then compare coverage of the same speech or event or whatever. All of the media will pick out single words from an hours-long talk and invent their own context, ignoring the rest of the hour
Post reply on HN