• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Fake News/Real News Chart

I agree with the layout of the of that chart for the X axis, though I think Brietbart has moved itself a bit beyond that batch that it's in and I'd move NPR a bit closer to where the WaPo is located. I'd put Vox over around the location of slate. And I wouldn't really put things like the Daily Show, Colbert Report, Rush, or Hannity on there; those are not "news" outlets, those are entertainment outlets that talk about the news.

On the flip side, I do like the one in the OP as it relates to the indepth nature of reporting. Because quality of the reporting matters almost more than the lean. I agree with next to nothing that Vox writes, but I'm at least apt to read that and consider it because it'll at least be a well presented and thought out piece. I feel similar, in terms of the well presented thing, with much that comes out of NRO. Where as when you get to the clickbait type sites, I don't care what lean you are, there's nothing of real value there.

THe Y-axis seems pretty accurate too, IMO. And, the bubble chart is dead on.

I can see where some people would disagree on the exact location for where each source should lie on the bias grid, but they put them in roughly the right spot. I'd move Fox further Right, while shifting Huffpo and MSNBC further Left. And, I'm not sure I'd leave NPR in the dead Center. I think they skew a bit Left, although more so in how a story is presented than in outright partisanship, like a Huffpo.
 
The chart is pretty accurate. Only a Rightie would whine about it.

No only a lefty would accept this nonsense!
Belief in charts like this is why Trump is President elect!
And why the left is still making up crazy excuses for Hillary losing the election.
Who ever put it together is completely clueless.
 
CNN. "Better than not reading news at all."

Barely, they've gotten really bad as of late. They're essentially a junk mag now. National Enquirer style tripe.
 
No only a lefty would accept this nonsense!
Belief in charts like this is why Trump is President elect!
And why the left is still making up crazy excuses for Hillary losing the election.
Who ever put it together is completely clueless.

:lamo
 
Perhaps the issue isn't the chart. Perhaps the issue is that right wingers tend to be further right than left wingers tend to be towards the left. If that is the case, then right wingers and left wingers will perceive the lean of each of those sources very differently.

Shhhhhh, don't say reasonable things. We're trying to discuss how every media outlet we personally don't like is obviously hyper-partisan in the direction we don't like.
 
So the following, according to the chart, are mainstream (minimal partisan bias) and meet high standards?

View attachment 67211175

Such a rating is absolutely laughable and completely destroys the credibility of the chart, and whoever assembled it. Washington Post/New York Times = minimal partisan bias?

:lamo

Rueters??? BBC??? Both have been shown to use some HIGHLY questionable sources that they maintained even after being exposed.
 
The chart is pretty accurate. Only a Rightie would whine about it.

It's inaccurate. CNN is hardly unbiased. Save us the bull****.
 
It's inaccurate. CNN is hardly unbiased. Save us the bull****.

Haven't you noticed that to you every news source not telling you what you want to hear is biased to the Left?
 
Haven't you noticed that to you every news source not telling you what you want to hear is biased to the Left?

CNN has never been considered unbiased.
 
CNN has never been considered unbiased.

CNN just throws out headlines. I'm sure Blitzer and company are all Lefties, but their reporting is too shallow to be biased. In fact, if anything, CNN sucks because they do not challenge lies, Left or Right. They just regurgitate them.
 
I would argue that the opposite is actually true.

As a demonstration, here is study result of the ideological position of various news sources, many also appear in the above chart:

pew.png


To arrive at the chart above the creators would have to have a fairly significant left lean to have the NYT fall in the middle, or they graded on a curve and selected the middle to be where most of the new agencies sat.

That chart is more realistic and accurate IMO.

I'd trust Pew research more so than what someone posted on Facebook.
 
I would argue that the opposite is actually true.

As a demonstration, here is study result of the ideological position of various news sources, many also appear in the above chart:

pew.png


To arrive at the chart above the creators would have to have a fairly significant left lean to have the NYT fall in the middle, or they graded on a curve and selected the middle to be where most of the new agencies sat.

THe average respondent is probably Right Leaning, given that we are a Center-Right nation with more and more people leaning Right now than Left. In fact, it could be argued that the Far Left is effectively dead while the Far Right is in ascension.
 
THe average respondent is probably Right Leaning, given that we are a Center-Right nation with more and more people leaning Right now than Left. In fact, it could be argued that the Far Left is effectively dead while the Far Right is in ascension.

Um, no. The average respondent is clearly marked on that chart as being left of center.
 
Um, no. The average respondent is clearly marked on that chart as being left of center.

Not possible, unless they surveyed only those people who live on the coast.

2014-US-elections-state-legislatures-results-map.png

Anyone who thinks this is a Left of Center country should have their head examined.
 
I agree with this, Id say do your moves and then move MSNBC a little further left and Fox a little furth right and its a pretty good list.

Fox seems to be in the right place, IMO; basically an establishment RNC infomercial. i agree about MSNBC. it's basically liberal Fox, only not executed as well. it should occupy the same place on the left that Fox occupies on the right.
 
Fox seems to be in the right place, IMO; basically an establishment RNC infomercial. i agree about MSNBC. it's basically liberal Fox, only not executed as well. it should occupy the same place on the left that Fox occupies on the right.

I agree they should occupy the same space left/right and I agree MSNBC does not execute as well, Fox is like the MJ of RNC infomercial and MSNBC is like the Kobe of DNC infomercial. But I would still nudge them both slightly further left and right, just slightly though. Like if 0 is center and they are both currently at +/- 5 (that line they are one, ipush them to a +/- 7 where only a 3rd of their name appears in the reputable lane lol Thats nitpicking I know but its how i feel. :)
 
I agree they should occupy the same space left/right and I agree MSNBC does not execute as well, Fox is like the MJ of RNC infomercial and MSNBC is like the Kobe of DNC infomercial. But I would still nudge them both slightly further left and right, just slightly though. Like if 0 is center and they are both currently at +/- 5 (that line they are one, ipush them to a +/- 7 where only a 3rd of their name appears in the reputable lane lol Thats nitpicking I know but its how i feel. :)

yeah, i don't really disagree with that.
 
This graphic is laughable at best. For one thing, mainstream is not the same thing as unbiased. Secondly, why is CNN rated so much lower than Fox and MSNBC?
 
This graphic is laughable at best. For one thing, mainstream is not the same thing as unbiased. Secondly, why is CNN rated so much lower than Fox and MSNBC?

^ This. Fox should be squarely in the Mainstream column. This chart is clearly biased and should not under any circumstances be used as an end-all-be-all metric to gauge how accurate your news source is. Granted, they get some rankings correct, like Natural News and Breitbart, but the rest of it is ambiguous and questionable at best.
 
Slate is waaay too high, when they get away from politics it can be interesting but it's pretty bias and not at all "good." Neither is Vox, The Atlantic, or The Guardian. Atlantic and Guardian are more HuffPo level. Fox could be higher up, the TV side is mostly trash but the website side tends to be alright, if a bit bias now and then.

NYT should be lower, it's been slipping lately from what I've seen.
 
I would argue that the opposite is actually true.

As a demonstration, here is study result of the ideological position of various news sources, many also appear in the above chart:

pew.png


To arrive at the chart above the creators would have to have a fairly significant left lean to have the NYT fall in the middle, or they graded on a curve and selected the middle to be where most of the new agencies sat.

The problem with that analysis is that people of different ideological leans will attend to different sources for different reasons. Liberals might attend to far right sources (or the opposite) in order to gather information or just to allow themselves to get angry. That's a major flaw in the above chart.
 
Fox News should be much further to the "crazy right" than it is. Plus CNN is 2 stations, CNN and CNN International. The latter is quite (relatively) unbiased and still worth a watch.

As usual, the right however will howl against the liberal media and all, but that only proves that the chart is correct. For the right, the only media that matters is the one that projects the news the right want.. not the truth and facts. This is why Fox News is placed wrongly.
 
The problem with that analysis is that people of different ideological leans will attend to different sources for different reasons. Liberals might attend to far right sources (or the opposite) in order to gather information or just to allow themselves to get angry. That's a major flaw in the above chart.

I think the rate that that actually happens is pretty small. Most people don't go out looking to challenge their own beliefs.
 
Interesting. I have never heard of any of the outlets in the Liberal utter garbage column but have heard of all the ones in the conservative utter garbage one.

Because Conservatives are much more apt to get their news from utter garbage sites than liberals. Its why fake news that targets a conservative audience gets a lot more traffic than fake news targeting a liberal audience.
 
Back
Top Bottom