mediabiasfactcheck.com is useful for it’s “factual” measure of sources, but the right-left spectrum is based on what Americans consider “right” and “left” -so what they consider “far left,” outside America is probably just “left.” They label a lot of international centrist media sources as “left” too. What they consider “least biased” is going to be straight up capitalist.
I mean…if we’re being real…the only people who do legitimate fact checking are leftists. The right hates the truth which is why the constantly attack the media. The nice thing about MBFC is that the team is international and anyone, anywhere can challenge their conclusions. I tend to very much agree with their ratings on the large, well known media such as the BBC, CBC, Reuters, AP, etc.
Nobody except you is triggered here, I’m just pointing out the hilarity of you not being able to understand the concept of a bias. The fact that you see that as an insult makes it all the more hilarious.
I mean, I think Canadian Dimension themselves would admit that they are on the far left of the political spectrum. But that’s not a bad thing per se. I want to see a spectrum of perspectives in the media, so long as those perspectives are factual and in good faith (which many on the far right are not).
I do find their reporting to be lower quality and less factual than other left leaning sources, like Fair.org or Current Affairs. So this seems like a fair assessment to me.
The key part to recognize is that every position has an inherent bias to it, and just because a particular position happens to be mainstream doesn’t make it less biased. Canadian Dimension is on the far left of Canadian politics, however it can be argued that the reason for that is that Canadian political mainstream is biased towards the right.
In general, these labels aren’t terribly useful and they’re just used to dismiss information without actually engaging with the content. It’s much better to point out the cases when reporting is not factual, and to address them specifically regardless of where a source leans politically.
So, if people want to raise disagreements with the content of the article in the submission that’s great. However smearing it is just engaging in anti intellectual behavior.
I do agree with you that MapleEngineer is being silly. You can’t just dismiss Canadian Dimension because it’s “on the left”. Frankly, the best Canadian journalism is on the left, including The Tyee, The Narwhal, Canadaland, Literary Review of Canada, etc.
That said, I think these labels can be useful. I doubt you would object so strongly if someone pointed out that Rebel News is far right. If I didn’t know what Rebel News was, I would consider that useful information. I would sooner say that reality has a left leaning bias than deny that a news source is left leaning.
Right, there’s no problem with saying something is on the left or on the right. The two observations I’m making is that what we consider to be the centre is relative to our culture, and that sites like media bias are themselves inherently biased.
For example, around 90% of young people in China identify with Marxism. So, what would be considered political centre in China would be considered far left in Canada. And this highlights how silly it is to rely on such labels when deciding whether a particular position is reasonable or extreme.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !canada@lemmy.ca
Far left source.
Don’t shove your US media ruler on our Canadian media
mediabiasfactcheck.com is useful for it’s “factual” measure of sources, but the right-left spectrum is based on what Americans consider “right” and “left” -so what they consider “far left,” outside America is probably just “left.” They label a lot of international centrist media sources as “left” too. What they consider “least biased” is going to be straight up capitalist.
I mean…if we’re being real…the only people who do legitimate fact checking are leftists. The right hates the truth which is why the constantly attack the media. The nice thing about MBFC is that the team is international and anyone, anywhere can challenge their conclusions. I tend to very much agree with their ratings on the large, well known media such as the BBC, CBC, Reuters, AP, etc.
A guy who guzzles propaganda tends to largely agree with the propaganda sources he guzzles. News at a 11.
I’d like to introduce you to “opinion articles” where bias is the centre-piece.
LMAO imagine being a grown ass adult and thinking sites like mediabiasfactcheck are factual and unbiased.
It’s got to be so tiring to be so easily triggered. Your insults are utterly wasted on me. I see what you are and I feel sorry for you.
Nobody except you is triggered here, I’m just pointing out the hilarity of you not being able to understand the concept of a bias. The fact that you see that as an insult makes it all the more hilarious.
YAWN!
Lmao
I mean, I think Canadian Dimension themselves would admit that they are on the far left of the political spectrum. But that’s not a bad thing per se. I want to see a spectrum of perspectives in the media, so long as those perspectives are factual and in good faith (which many on the far right are not).
I do find their reporting to be lower quality and less factual than other left leaning sources, like Fair.org or Current Affairs. So this seems like a fair assessment to me.
The key part to recognize is that every position has an inherent bias to it, and just because a particular position happens to be mainstream doesn’t make it less biased. Canadian Dimension is on the far left of Canadian politics, however it can be argued that the reason for that is that Canadian political mainstream is biased towards the right.
In general, these labels aren’t terribly useful and they’re just used to dismiss information without actually engaging with the content. It’s much better to point out the cases when reporting is not factual, and to address them specifically regardless of where a source leans politically.
So, if people want to raise disagreements with the content of the article in the submission that’s great. However smearing it is just engaging in anti intellectual behavior.
I do agree with you that MapleEngineer is being silly. You can’t just dismiss Canadian Dimension because it’s “on the left”. Frankly, the best Canadian journalism is on the left, including The Tyee, The Narwhal, Canadaland, Literary Review of Canada, etc.
That said, I think these labels can be useful. I doubt you would object so strongly if someone pointed out that Rebel News is far right. If I didn’t know what Rebel News was, I would consider that useful information. I would sooner say that reality has a left leaning bias than deny that a news source is left leaning.
Right, there’s no problem with saying something is on the left or on the right. The two observations I’m making is that what we consider to be the centre is relative to our culture, and that sites like media bias are themselves inherently biased.
For example, around 90% of young people in China identify with Marxism. So, what would be considered political centre in China would be considered far left in Canada. And this highlights how silly it is to rely on such labels when deciding whether a particular position is reasonable or extreme.
The title is painted absurdly too