CherenkovBlue@iusearchlinux.fyi 8 months ago
Seems like the analysis is starting from the hypothesis that the BBC is biased, while a better scientific inquiry is “IS the BBC biased”.
No?
Positing something and validating the theory through research is appropriate scientific inquiry.
It’s obvious to many people that the BBC had a bias, there was no need to ask the question when they could answer the question.
If you disagree, feel free to present a compelling study as to why you think so. That’s how the scientific method works.
A hypothesis is “I think x is true” or “x will happen if I do y.” It is a conclusory statement based on existing knowledge that then has to be proven and is one of the first things you learn to do in science. Asking “what happened to x” or “what is x” is not a hypothesis, it’s an open-ended inquiry. While both are useful, the hypothesis is specifically part of the scientific method. You’re proving or disproving smaller conclusions to answer a broader open-ended inquiry.
Stoneykins@mander.xyz 8 months ago
Noooooooooo. No.
Everyone and every organization has a bias. Even a “neutral” bias is a bias. Finding out which way their bias leans is good info to figure out.