Media bias and fact-checking ratings

[zoogs]

Agree, BRB. I think the more relevant thing about CNN is that they put out a lot of low-quality, clickbait type stuff (which comes with being a general audience 24-hour cable news network). They also aren't that left-leaning, but their appeals to 'balance' (hiring Corey Lewandowski? Giving a stage to awful talking heads?...) is as wrongheaded as the NYT handing the proverbial mic to out-and-out climate denier Bret Stephens.

The Hill has struck me as more center than it's often been given credit for. The Economist must be somewhat center-right, no?

(NPR as only sometimes using evidence based reporting surprised me, as did the bucket for state run tyranny area).

Well, to the bold, you're looking at Infowars. As for NPR's evidence-based science reporting record, that's surprising and it kind of has me questioning this source. Or at least their results. Their "purge garbage" collection is pretty good, though. Don't Mercola, guys.

He accused me (he says jokingly) of getting the info from Rachel Maddow, John Oliver or Schemer

This strikes me as common. I think we get to a dangerous area when we start viewing sources in a tribal way -- either "on our team, the Good Team" and therefore unimpeachable, or flawed fake news whose readers deserve automatic dismissal.

 

[Kiyoat Husker]

One thing about the original post, I would personally rank them fairly similar to how they are listed. However, I find one in particular interesting. CNN being "Left Bias". Personally, I would put them as "lean left". But, from what I gather with the methodology, people visiting the site can vote on various media outlets as to how they feel their reporting is.

So....you have a very very large group of people who watch Fox and in turn are big fans of the President. Both Fox and the President constantly paint CNN as this horribly left wing nut job outlet.

Well.....guess where all the voting public has them.

I agree with your take on why CNN was possibly "picked on" in that assessment. I was wrong, however, on the method. I think that the one guy, with a handful of volunteers, do all the ratings. However, I found this little nugget in their method:

We will occasionally select our own fact-checks to research, but primarily rely on submissions from users of our website.

So the fact-checking is from readers submissions. That probably explains the MSNBC and CNN fact ratings (as well as some of the conservative-leaning ones, like Forbes).

 

[Kiyoat Husker]

The Hill has struck me as more center than it's often been given credit for. The Economist must be somewhat center-right, no?

Yeah, both of those sources are ones I'm less familiar with, but generally seem to be well-respected. I may have to check them out as potential intelligent counter-points to my own bias.

 

[Kiyoat Husker]

Bump. For the cool charts.