Government paper says Britain must act robustly if interests challenged by the Chinese development model

    • DolphinMath@slrpnk.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Cool. It’s one data point, and it adds to the discussion.

      The title of your 2018 article is: “We can probably measure media bias. But do we want to?”

      My answer is yes, I do.

      https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/columbia-journalism-review/

      Detailed Report

      Bias Rating: LEFT-CENTER

      Factual Reporting: HIGH

      Country: USA

      Press Freedom Rank: MOSTLY FREE

      Media Type: Magazine

      Traffic/Popularity: Medium Traffic

      MBFC Credibility Rating: HIGH CREDIBILITY

        • DolphinMath@slrpnk.netOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          11 months ago

          Based on how quickly you’re spamming all my comments, I’m pretty sure I read a lot more than you do.

          • palal@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            So… You haven’t read the article then, I take it?

            • DolphinMath@slrpnk.netOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              I actually have on this one. It was a decent opinion piece (if a little dated). It also appears the Media Bias/Fact Check website reflected the criticism and has made some changes since 2018.

              For anyone only interested in the bit about the Media Bais/Fact Check mention.

              The armchair academics

              Amateur attempts at such tools already exist, and have found plenty of fans. Google “media bias,” and you’ll find Media Bias/Fact Check, run by armchair media analyst Dave Van Zandt. The site’s methodology is simple: Van Zandt and his team rate each outlet from 0 to 10 on the categories of biased wording and headlines, factuality and sourcing, story choices (“does the source report news from both sides”), and political affiliation.

              A similar effort is “The Media Bias Chart,” or simply, “The Chart.” Created by Colorado patent attorney Vanessa Otero, the chart has gone through several methodological iterations, but currently is based on her evaluation of outlets’ stories on dimensions of veracity, fairness, and expression.

              Both efforts suffer from the very problem they’re trying to address: Their subjective assessments leave room for human biases, or even simple inconsistencies, to creep in. Compared to Gentzkow and Shapiro, the five to 20 stories typically judged on these sites represent but a drop of mainstream news outlets’ production.”