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

Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 468 posts

Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing

#311

Post by _ea1k »

beaconstudios wrote: post #235
bryanlarsen wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would appreciate less emphasis on pretending to cover news from several angles. By doing so they imply that both sides are equally valid even when they're not. For instance I've seen them bring on a climate change denier to give the "other side" on a climate change story; anti vaxxers, et cetera. It's particularly bad when one side is willing to lie.

that arguably is another form of political bias - if I want to push position A, I will choose the most ridiculous and deranged proponent of position B to imply that "all rational people choose position A". Like on the issue of climate change - there's clearly some fraction of people who choose to deny it completely, but the more meaningful debate at this point is around how much we can do to prevent it, and what appr…

Exactly... one of the big problems is trotting out the weakest possible arguments for whatever view opposes your network's preferred narrative.

Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing

#312

Post by ardy42 »

eeeeeeeeeeeee wrote: post #218
dman wrote: post #131

I do pay for news, however one request I have for news providers is a greater emphasis on presenting news from all sides. Over the last 4-5 years most news providers have picked a political side (to a much greater extent than I recall in the past). This is true in both countries for which I follow news (India and the US). Given an event I can predict the coverage that venues will give it. This is troubling to me, and…

Completely disagree. I want the facts, backed by people who know the situation. I do not want “fair and balanced.” Not all sides have equal grounding and I’m tired of this false equivalence. We are seriously in times where one side denies climate change. There is zero point in giving them time because it elevates their point to being equal to the one backed by actual climate scientists, not industry that has a vested…

> Completely disagree. I want the facts, backed by people who know the situation. I do not want “fair and balanced.” Not all sides have equal grounding and I’m tired of this false equivalence.

However, it's more subtle that that. It is a fact that so-and-so holds this-or-that position or belief, even if that position is wrong or incorrect. Those kinds of facts should be reported on, especially when they encode the beliefs and position of a major politician or political faction. A reporter also cannot outright contradict such a person, except in very clear cases, without seeming partisan, so they have to juggle with the prominence or try to inject a more authoritative counterpoint.

It's a hard line to walk, even when newsrooms were fully staffed.

Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing

#313

Post by nemacol »

I signed up for NYT and canceled the next day.

After becoming a paying customer they do not remove the ads from apps, pop ups on the website, etc etc. I was annoyed so I decided to cancel. The cancellation process was also quite annoying. Couldn't just do it through a form, I had to chat or call. I was on hold in the chat room for 35 minutes before someone got on and asked me what I wanted. At that point I was quite annoyed.

The person in chat was perfectly friendly and handled the rest of the cancellation process swiftly.

I am happy to pay for content but I'll be damned if I am going to pay and still be subjected to popups and ads between every paragraph.

Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing

#315

Post by mattferderer »

50656E6973 wrote: post #282
beaconstudios wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

that arguably is another form of political bias - if I want to push position A, I will choose the most ridiculous and deranged proponent of position B to imply that "all rational people choose position A". Like on the issue of climate change - there's clearly some fraction of people who choose to deny it completely, but the more meaningful debate at this point is around how much we can do to prevent it, and what appr…

It's a "strawman". You see this in fake wrestling: a designedly weak contender is set up to get owned by the audience's favorite protagonist

Do they still do that? I thought that was a 90's thing.

Also known as a "Squash Match".

If pro wrestling can move on from them, maybe news media should too!

Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing

#316

Post by tossaccount123 »

dman wrote: post #131

I do pay for news, however one request I have for news providers is a greater emphasis on presenting news from all sides. Over the last 4-5 years most news providers have picked a political side (to a much greater extent than I recall in the past). This is true in both countries for which I follow news (India and the US). Given an event I can predict the coverage that venues will give it. This is troubling to me, and…

There's also the fact that the MSM has made complete asses of themselves over the last few years.

Has "Fake News" ever knocked trillions of dollars off the stock market because they ran an unverified story that implied the president would be impeached?

https://nypost.com/2017/12/02/abc-news-corrects-flynn-bombsh...

At some point there needs to more accountability for these organizations than "Oh, sorry about that"

I'm not sure why the media and journalists still get held up to some nostalgic ideal of brave upholders of truth. The majority of news organizations are owned by billionaires pushing their own agenda or giant corporations that only care about profit. Truth is secondary at this point.

Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing

#317

Post by jshowa3 »

tossaccount123 wrote: post #316
dman wrote: post #131

I do pay for news, however one request I have for news providers is a greater emphasis on presenting news from all sides. Over the last 4-5 years most news providers have picked a political side (to a much greater extent than I recall in the past). This is true in both countries for which I follow news (India and the US). Given an event I can predict the coverage that venues will give it. This is troubling to me, and…

There's also the fact that the MSM has made complete asses of themselves over the last few years. Has "Fake News" ever knocked trillions of dollars off the stock market because they ran an unverified story that implied the president would be impeached? https://nypost.com/2017/12/02/abc-news-corrects-flynn-bombsh... At some point there needs to more accountability for these organizations than "Oh, sorry about that" I'…

Facebook lost a lot of stock value over the Cambridge Analytics scandal and the spread of fake info after it was reported on. Of course, this assumes this was the actual cause of its declining stock value, since it recently increased.

So yes, it has been assumed to have happened.

Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing

#318

Post by bzbarsky »

awinder wrote: post #273
beaconstudios wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm aware of that. But then that's a slightly different topic - why do some people believe in climate change where others do not? I mean, I believe in anthropomorphic climate change but that's not because I have read the scientific papers and understood the nuance and the data - it's because I trust that the media is at least reporting in the right ball park, even if the nuance is lacking and the accuracy is minimal.…

> saying we need to aggressively regulate industries and eliminate blue-collar energy jobs in favour of high-tech clean energy (both generally considered left wing policies/strategies already) There’s 180K people employed in oil, coal, and natural gas jobs compared to 370K in solar. From a pure numbers standpoint this is just a completely farscical angle, but it’s a great example of why there is no true media bias pr…

I'm curious about the source of your numbers. In particular, see https://www.politifact.com/illinois/statements/2017/apr/25/b... (which has numbers comparable to yours for solar, but 160k jobs for just coal, not counting oil and natural gas, in the US).

Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing

#319

Post by warp_factor »

rdschouw wrote: post #214
8ytecoder wrote: post #77

A few complaints I share with the other people in this thread: - It's not clear that even reputed newspapers like NYTimes/WaPo produce quality content consistently. As someone in tech I can clearly see what they get and what they don't. Extrapolating it - it's not at all clear they understand economics or foreign policy or policy impact or environmental concerns and how to address them ...etc. - Bias: every single on…

I moved from NYT to Economist for all of these reasons. NYT went berserk after the 2016 elections if you ask me. Now every article feels like an opinion piece.

I agree with you but to be honest, 95% of the traditional medias decided to chose a camp after the 2016 elections.

Since then It is extremely difficult to find a neutral news with clear facts. I distrust the NYT as much as I distrust Fox news.

Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing

#320

Post by bzbarsky »

beaconstudios wrote: post #275
awinder wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> saying we need to aggressively regulate industries and eliminate blue-collar energy jobs in favour of high-tech clean energy (both generally considered left wing policies/strategies already) There’s 180K people employed in oil, coal, and natural gas jobs compared to 370K in solar. From a pure numbers standpoint this is just a completely farscical angle, but it’s a great example of why there is no true media bias pr…

but you've just proved the point - the industry has shifted in favour of high tech over blue collar. I'm willing to bet that the disparity wasn't the same in the Bush era. I don't personally think it's a conspiracy - as I said, I believe that we need to attempt to counteract anthropomorphic climate change. But the evidence does bear the idea out. The idea that Republicans are all just morons is cancerous as fuck. And…

For what it's worth, most of the jobs "in solar" are installers. Very much blue collar (also, fairly dangerous work).

Agreed with the rest of your points.

Post reply on HN