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

101–110 of 163 posts

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

#101

Post by jjn2009 »

PaulHoule wrote: post #89
jjn2009 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>In some sense CNN was biased towards Trump because he's interesting. Bias with respect to how much coverage there was of the candidates, however many would say the content of that coverage was biased against him. Besides this small point I agree. Time spent on a particular subject or topic is a subtle bias in itself which can be driven by many things (including money) and has huge effects on public perception of peo…

I think the sheer amount of press coverage that Trump got made him stand out of the pack. Really I think a lot of the negative coverage Trump got could have been beneficial to him. For instance, if you are looking for somebody who is going to "shake up Washington", then denunciations from Republicans such as Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan add to his credibility.

I think it's more probable than not that it ended up helping him, but it significantly polarized opinion of him as a candidate.

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

#102

Post by hga »

PaulHoule wrote: post #89
jjn2009 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>In some sense CNN was biased towards Trump because he's interesting. Bias with respect to how much coverage there was of the candidates, however many would say the content of that coverage was biased against him. Besides this small point I agree. Time spent on a particular subject or topic is a subtle bias in itself which can be driven by many things (including money) and has huge effects on public perception of peo…

I think the sheer amount of press coverage that Trump got made him stand out of the pack. Really I think a lot of the negative coverage Trump got could have been beneficial to him. For instance, if you are looking for somebody who is going to "shake up Washington", then denunciations from Republicans such as Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan add to his credibility.

But you're leaving out one crucial detail: unlike e.g. Romney, he didn't wilt under such fire.

Denunciations only work when they convince people. White male Republicans who've internalized the supposed guilt they were born with don't even need the convincing bit....

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

#103

Post by cwisecarver »

551199 wrote: post #93
splawn wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Reality is lot of the science is wrong as well. Intentionally paid by special interest or the end result is defined before any science is done. You don't want to look science religiously either.

IIRC one of the main tenants of science, when I was learning it in middle school in the early '90s, was that it's fact until it's disproven. We don't know everything about it which is what makes it different than religion. There's no faith involved.

I know a lot of it is corrupt and aiming for a target but good scientists will tell you that they're basing their findings on studies which may have flaws and they'd want you to try and reproduce their studies to tell them if they've gotten something wrong.

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

#104

Post by garysieling »

nogbit wrote: post #70
garysieling wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a recent trend in the higher quality side of long-form articles to including primary source materials (videos, documents from trials, etc) in articles, but it's a lot of work.

"it's a lot of work"....of course it is, as it should be! Throwing wordpress postings at the wall to see if a headline will stick is trash journalism...from all sides.

Yeah, agreed

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

#105

Post by anasfirdousi »

I'm already working on my startup which started way before this election. News bias didnt happen and it is not a new problem. It's been there for centuries. Unfortunately, it's my startup idea and I don't want to open source it. The work is in its super early stages but if some one is interested in teaming up on this and working together, shoot me an email at anas.firdousi@gmail.com. I live in Silicon Valley so if your local it will be great but location doesn't really matter if you passionate about the idea!

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

#106

Post by anasfirdousi »

I'm already working on my startup which started way before this election. News bias didnt happen and it is not a new problem. It's been there for centuries. Unfortunately, it's my startup idea and I don't want to open source it. The work is in its super early stages but if some one is interested in teaming up on this and working together, shoot me an email at anas.firdousi@gmail.com. I live in Silicon Valley so if your local it will be great but location doesn't really matter if you passionate about the idea!

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

#107

Post by NumberCruncher »

grzm wrote: post #97
NumberCruncher wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you read the post I linked in? It's says that the incoming information aka. news are irrelevant to our life and we should just ignore them. There are no real issues you have to act on. If a hurricane is coming, you will know it without reading the news. Therefore bias and misinformation are also irrelevant to our life. Just to have a counterpoint to this news obsessed discussion.

Yes, I did read the post you linked to. I am also responding to the quote you provided. I should think that you quoted it because you thought it was particularly relevant or representative, did you not? Edited to add: I also found it frustrating that a post arguing against reading the news includes a "You should follow me on twitter here" link at the bottom. Please don't insinuate that someone hasn't read an article.…

>> I should think that you quoted it because you thought it was particularly relevant or representative, did you not?

And that's why I started it with "sorry for the offtopic". You do not always read what you want to but what you have to.

I just try to correct the bias I am concerned about. Lessons learned:

- bias is subjective

- there are people who like to stay in their own biased world

Am I relevant enough now?

Cheers!

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

#108

Post by internaut »

hga wrote: post #86
internaut wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The alt right is the popular front of the NRX. Scott Alexander has a good overview here: http://slatestarcodex.com/2013/03/03/reactionary-philosophy-... This quote is priceless "The good Catholic in medieval Spain doesn’t feel repressed, even when the Inquisition drags away her neighbor. She feels like decent people have total freedom to worship whichever saint they want, total freedom to go to whatever cathedral the…

I don't think I can be a member of the NRx without a possessing a thousand times more patience than I have to slog through Moldbug's writings, but you make a great point in your tl;dr, " many beliefs about modern society are not just wrong, but not even wrong. ", thanks for noticing that connection/formulation.

Listen, the important thing is that when Peter lit the Beacons of Gondor, the Men (+Elves/Dwarfs/Hobbits) of the West answered the call.

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

#109

Post by hga »

internaut wrote: post #108
hga wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think I can be a member of the NRx without a possessing a thousand times more patience than I have to slog through Moldbug's writings, but you make a great point in your tl;dr, " many beliefs about modern society are not just wrong, but not even wrong. ", thanks for noticing that connection/formulation.

Listen, the important thing is that when Peter lit the Beacons of Gondor, the Men (+Elves/Dwarfs/Hobbits) of the West answered the call.

But only if they managed to slog thought the books that far!

As far as I know, one of the things Tolkien created was what I call the "long slog" genre of fantasy, which involves the hero(es) traveling great distances, often getting the story bogged down in their travels (yeah, I know it's been done before).

I did manage to finish the trilogy, mostly because I had little better to read that I hadn't or wouldn't, back in those days in my small city prior to the Internet, but I see more than a little commonality between the two authors, except Tolkien had a lot more respect for his audience, i.e. was willing to take the extra effort to keep it focused and on track.

(And compare to Robert Jordan, who just stopped the plot for long enough I gave up on the series, life's just too short for it. I also didn't pick up an early and important, extremely plot significant clue about the taint.)

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

#110

Post by 551199 »

cwisecarver wrote: post #103
551199 wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reality is lot of the science is wrong as well. Intentionally paid by special interest or the end result is defined before any science is done. You don't want to look science religiously either.

IIRC one of the main tenants of science, when I was learning it in middle school in the early '90s, was that it's fact until it's disproven. We don't know everything about it which is what makes it different than religion. There's no faith involved. I know a lot of it is corrupt and aiming for a target but good scientists will tell you that they're basing their findings on studies which may have flaws and they'd want…

Sure but what if it was never a fact. 'Fat makes you fat' or similar falsification that have real impact to society[0]

We shouldn't attribute everything to malice, but there are clear issues in science:

'Too many of the findings that fill the academic either are the result of shoddy experiments or poor analysis

Last year researchers at one biotech firm, Amgen, found they could reproduce just six of 53 “landmark” studies in cancer research. Earlier, a group at Bayer, a drug company, managed to repeat just a quarter of 67 similarly important papers. A leading computer scientist frets that three-quarters of papers in his subfield are bunk. In 2000-10 roughly 80,000 patients took part in clinical trials based on research that was later retracted because of mistakes or improprieties.

Careerism also encourages exaggeration and the cherry-picking of results. In order to safeguard their exclusivity, the leading journals impose high rejection rates: in excess of 90% of submitted manuscripts. The most striking findings have the greatest chance of making it onto the page.

Conversely, failures to prove a hypothesis are rarely even offered for publication, let alone accepted. “Negative results” now account for only 14% of published papers, down from 30% in 1990. Yet knowing what is false is as important to science as knowing what is true. The failure to report failures means that researchers waste money and effort exploring blind alleys already investigated by other scientists.'[1]

[0] https://www.amazon.com/Salt-Sugar-Fat-Giants-Hooked/dp/08129... [1] http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21588069-scientific-re...

[2] Alan Sokal - Beyond the Hoax: Science, Philosophy and Culture https://www.amazon.com/Beyond-Hoax-Science-Philosophy-Cultur... [3] How to Lie with Statistics - https://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/03... [4] Nassim Taleb 'Incerto', twitter.com/nntaleb

Post reply on HN