Comment

Comment on Why are people downvoting the MediaBiasFactChecker not?

The libertarian, “drown the government in the bathtub” group are centrists now?

Are you serious? Social issues aren’t the only thing you can swing left and right on. This is a massive pro corporate blindspot if MBFC continues that as a trend.

Nobody is saying lean makes something misinformation. We’re saying the way the categories are used deceives, “a typical fast food eating, reality tv watching, not-super-engaged American” into believing good objective sources are running biased articles.

And the American left is the center in the rest of the world. Playing into the American idea of centrism only makes the project biased, not some high minded goal. That’s some of that good exceptionalism propaganda.

And reframing things to fit our own perspective? From the person defending the end of the federal government as a centrist position.

You put a lot of high minded stuff in there but it comes down to American Exceptionalism trying to force its views on the rest of the world and a shit take on enlightened centrism. The facts on the ground are clear. MBFC plays favorites for conservatives.

source

Sort:hotnew top

corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

The libertarian, “drown the government in the bathtub” group are centrists now?

American centrist. That’s like 3/4 right :-p

The “laissez-faire” part got me. When anyone leaves gov and especially biz to do their thing without steering and criticism, then people are gonna suffer to make someone some shillings.

source
Carrolade@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
No, they’re center-right. The center right still believes in representation and voting, where the far right is an authoritarian movement. This is an important distinction.

So, an editorial slant and objective, fact-based reporting are two different things. Your bias comes in with things like article selection, what you are and are not reporting. You can be strongly biased, but still do objective, fact-based reporting. This is why these are two separate categories. This is not a problem, and both of these independent categories most definitely deserve to be reported independently of each other.

It has nothing to do with exceptionalism. It has to do with performing measurements that are calibrated to the local environment. Someone pointed out that it makes less sense for world news, but for US news and politics communities it is definitely useful.

When did I say the end of the federal government is a centrist position?

You’re a very dishonest arguer. This has nothing to do with any form of American superiority. Simply discussion of American affairs from a perspective calibrated to American people. Saying that this has usefulness is not saying it is superior or exceptional, those are things you, not I, are saying.

source
- Maggoty@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  You absolutely do not have to be authoritarian to be far right. And the Ayn Rand Institute is libertarian. Their goal is to effectively end all governance in favor of corporations. So yes you are defending that.
  
  And someone like MBFC presenting that as a centrist position of any kind is a giant problem.
  
  You say I’m dishonest but you keep saying obvious things but then slipping in ridiculous stuff. Like saying MBFC should be more conservative because it’s American. But then ignoring that it rates international papers.
  
  Is Al Jazeera doing endorsements now? BBC? Whose the British government backing?
  
  You cannot have this both ways. It cannot be an American scale available globally, rating globally.
  
  source
  - Carrolade@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    No, libertarians advocate for small government, not no government. Someone still has to provide for the common defense, uphold laws, things like that. And far right is always authoritarian in some way, shape or form. I cannot think of a single government in history we would describe as far right that was not authoritarian. Also, there is a difference between seeking accurate classification of something from a certain perspective and defending it. You are not very accurate at describing things, including my arguments. Again, center does not equal good. Center just means center, and is often bad.
    
    It does not matter if it rates international sources or not, if doing so for an American audience as an American organization, it should do so from an American perspective. There is nothing wrong with explaining to Americans how international sources fit into their established worldview.
    
    Note, I never said MBFC should be more conservative. If anything they should be shifting slightly leftward as Trump’s popularity wanes, to track with the attitudes of the country. Not a lot though, the race is still close to even.
    
    I don’t understand what you’re getting at with AJ and BBC endorsements, can you elaborate?
    
    source
    Maggoty@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    No. Small government sounds nice but it’s only ever meant two things. Privatization or deregulation and strict social laws. Depends on whose saying it. And libertarians are in the privatization group. No matter how you cut it, that’s a radical position. The center is occupied by the regulated market and public services the vast majority of Americans enjoy and like.
    
    And it very much matters that it rates international sources. That makes it inaccurate by design everywhere outside the US. A disinfo op, meant to confuse people and whitewash conservative sources.
    
    They shouldn’t be tracking any one country. There are objective definitions for political ideology.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
- Nibodhika@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  Lots of what you’re saying smells like bullshit, but I would like to point one specific thing:
  
  The center right still believes in representation and voting, where the far right is an authoritarian movement. This is an important distinction.
  
  That’s not how it works, left/right and libertarian/authoritarian are different axis, because left/right are economic terms, they can be replaced by collectivism/individualism, just like how the other axis can be replaced by Anarchism/Totalitarism. You can have an extreme libertarian-right (e.g. anarcho-capitalist) or an extreme totalitarian-right (e.g. fascism), just like you can have an extreme libertarian-left (e.g. Kibutz) or extreme totalitarian-left (e.g. communism as implemented in the USSR).
  
  Also there’s a third axis of conservative/progressive. Just because you live in a country where conservatives and right wings are the same doesn’t mean everyone else does. For example in the two right wing examples I gave, one (anarcho-capitalist) is extremely progressive while the other (fascism) is extremely conservative.
  
  In the end you can think on the 3 axis according to different questions:
  
  How should money be split? This is left/right or collectivism/individualism
  
  Who should rule? This is libertarian/totalitarian or anarchism/totalitarism
  
  How to deal with new ideas? This is conservative/progressive
  
  For example, taxes and where to use them are (in general ) a left/right debate, whereas security is (usually) a libertarian/totalitarian debate, and abortion, drugs and most things related to new ideas are (again, usually) conservative/progressive.
  
  source
  - Carrolade@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    Yes, that’s fair. I was trying to remain within the oversimplified standard US perspective on these things, which does boil all of that down to one, single axis, largely as a result of our two party system. I agree it is a poor and inaccurate method though.
    
    source