Comment on Any FLOSS alternative's to Ground News?
RushLana@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 days ago
Hi, I want to warn you about services claiming to sell “unbiased” advice : Ground news is biased, their alignment of left and right is subjective as all politics is.
Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Not just that, but their definition of “left” often veers into the downright ludicrous. Sometimes i think the whole thing is just another psyop to move the Overton window ever farther right.
RushLana@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 day ago
Yeah, as a french person it still shock me that some US are considered left leaning when they are just billionaires mouth pieces.
otter@lemmy.ca 1 day ago
They do make it possible to adjust the ratings on your own account for the ones you disagree on
CallMeAnAI@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Purity test on Lemmy? Not left enough? Mild shock!
Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 1 day ago
That’s not the point. If you think CNN&Co. are left, I have news for you.
irotsoma@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 day ago
Yeah, the definitions are actually more about alignment with the US political parties rather than left or right. And since both parties are demonstrably right of center, just to different degrees, the bias meter should only be used to determine which political party’s sponsors likely biased the article.
For example, an article saying climate change is not human caused and presenting debunked evidence will be ranked mostly center and second mostly right. But an article calling for incentives to reduce use of fossils fuels will be ranked mostly left. That’s mostly center if anything. An article calling for the government to explicitly force companies to stop using fossil fuels would be mostly left and center. One further advocating for the government to take over energy companies that don’t comply and make energy production public would be mostly left. Just presenting scientific evidence and refusing to give a voice to debunked “alternative facts” is not a leftist position, it’s a centrist one at best and should be the baseline.