Spot Journalistic Bias and Manipulation (was Media Bias)

  • Thread starter Danoff
  • 447 comments
  • 38,530 views
Eunos_Cosmo
My point was that it was pure conjecture to even assume the sub was still intact and distasteful to put a countdown timer on those people's lives.
Click to expand...
So much of the terminally online sub discourse is grotesque, including--but certainly not limited to--the notion that the incident is some kind of "wealth tax" whereby if they didn't have $250k to plunk down on some stupid underwater tour instead of helping the needy they wouldn't get trapped and die.
 
Eunos_Cosmo
Ok this isn't bias but it is infuriating. Look at this CNN headline on google news:

View attachment 1266819

This bothers me a lot. We have no idea what the air supply on the sub is (there's a very real possibility that the sub had a catastrophic failure), and CNN knows this, but the temptation of establishing an arbitrary countdown timer for clicks was too impossible to resist. I bet some bag of ***** at the network wants to put a literal countdown timer on the page for the story.
Click to expand...
As I suspected, the sub had a catastrophic failure days ago, the crew dead instantly, and the whole "oxygen left" countdown was some ghoulish contrivance to make the story more engaging.

I wonder if we should rename this thread to "Spot the bad journalism" to cover more ground - different from cursed political content, but along the same lines.
 
Last edited:
Eunos_Cosmo
I wonder if we should rename this thread to "Spot the bad journalism" to cover more ground - different from cursed political content, but along the same lines.
Click to expand...
I mean media frequently has a bias towards bad journalism.
Eunos_Cosmo
As I suspected, the sub had a catastrophic failure days ago, the crew dead instantly, and the whole "oxygen left" countdown was some ghoulish contrivance to make the story more engaging.
Click to expand...
I'd imagine also no mood swings.
 
Last edited:
All the speculation on the passengers the past couple days, esp. the oxygen countdown, now looks even worse knowing the sub imploded 4 days ago.

Morbidly positive upside, the passengers felt no pain of suffering when they went. Pretty much the best possible outcome regarding death.
 
How difficult is it to say a cop hit a pedestrian?

cop-hit-pedestrian.jpg


Letting law enforcement representatives dictate articles isn't journalism.
myfox8.com

Person found injured after ‘unknown object’ strikes officer’s car on US 52 in Winston-Salem, police say

WINSTON-SALEM, N.C. (WGHP) — North Carolina State Highway Patrol is investigating after an “unknown object” struck an officer’s car and a person was found significantly injured. A…
myfox8.com myfox8.com
 
Wouldn't doubt that the local news outlet in Winston-Salem doesn't want to offend the local constabulary because it's their main source of news in a not-large metro area.

I think I'm just more amazed the unknown object survived their injuries for what was totally not quite but not unlike a hit-and-run.
 
Last edited:
We also got this one:

1708392345128.png


"Found dead" in this case meant "Was killed by Israeli forces during the phone call in which she pleaded for help from within the car she was in which had already been sufficiently riddled with bullets to kill everyone else inside".
 
UKMikey
Chaiya Raichik strikes again.
www.dailykos.com

Libs of TikTok targeted a district, then a non-binary student dies after campus assault

According to the Max Planck Institute for the Study of Crime, Security, and Law: “stochastic terrorism involves ‘the use of mass media to provoke random acts of ideologically motivated violence that are statistically predictable but individually...
www.dailykos.com
Click to expand...

How in the hell that's permitted as free speech is bordering on bewildering. No wonder these jackasses push for no legal responsibilities for anything that's said and contributed on their watch.
 
Pupik
How in the hell that's permitted as free speech is bordering on bewildering. No wonder these jackasses push for no legal responsibilities for anything that's said and contributed on their watch.
Click to expand...
The current standard for incitement (speech directed at producing and likely to produce imminent lawless action) recognizes individual agency and I think that's a good thing.

That rat's shtick is getting other rats outraged at stupid things and those other rats may turn to violence, as it is their nature, but that turn is dependent upon individual agency.

Edit: It's been a while since I listened to this so it may have profanity (not super likely given the topic), but I do recall it being very good.
legaltalknetwork.com

Imminent Lawless Action - Legal Talk Network

Ken White explores how the First Amendment has handled inflammatory speech, from Schenck to the current Brandenburg standard and all the way up to today.
legaltalknetwork.com legaltalknetwork.com
I think strong speech protections are good because weak ones are more likely to result in abuse by the state.
 
Last edited:
TexRex
The current standard for incitement (speech directed at producing and likely to produce imminent lawless action) recognizes individual agency and I think that's a good thing.

That rat's shtick is getting other rats outraged at stupid things and those other rats may turn to violence, as it is their nature, but that turn is dependent upon individual agency.

Edit: It's been a while since I listened to this so it may have profanity (not super likely given the topic), but I do recall it being very good.
legaltalknetwork.com

Imminent Lawless Action - Legal Talk Network

Ken White explores how the First Amendment has handled inflammatory speech, from Schenck to the current Brandenburg standard and all the way up to today.
legaltalknetwork.com legaltalknetwork.com
I think strong speech protections are good because weak ones are more likely to result in abuse by the state.
Click to expand...

There's something about an adult doxxing minors to support an agenda, along with inciting fighting words, which absolutely does not sit well with me, to put it nicely.

In the interest of this thread being about bias, "nicely" means she's psychotic, by also endangering herself to a degree, and the platform itself is gutless to do anything about it.
 
Last edited:
A remarkably bad faith article by NY Post...even for them.


Electric vehicles release more toxic emissions, are worse for the environment than gas-powered cars: study


It found that brakes and tires on EVs release 1,850 times more particle pollution compared to modern tailpipes, which have “efficient” exhaust filters, bringing gas-powered vehicles’ emissions to new lows.
Click to expand...

1. North American market cars do not have exhaust filters, and I would bet that the NY Post would come out against them if a mandate for them was seriously proposed.
2. ICE powered cars also have tires and brakes, and many ICE powered cars are heavier than BEVs, particularly the full size SUVs and Trucks that NY Post readers very likely drive.
3. BEVs are often equipped with harder compound tires that wear out more slowly than normal tires

Because EVs are on average 30% heavier, brakes and tires on the battery-powered cars wear out faster than on standard cars.

Emission Analytics found that tire wear emissions on half a metric tonne of battery weight in an EV are more than 400 times as great as direct exhaust particulate emissions.

For reference, half a metric tonne is equivalent to roughly 1,100 pounds.
Click to expand...

No citation given for brakes wearing out faster on battery powered cars, and its total ******** because EVs primarily use regenerative braking. I wouldn't be surprised if EVs get 2x or more life out of brake pads for equivalent vehicle weight.

A Tesla Model Y weighs up to about 4,500lbs. That's heavy, but it's not more than an ICE-only Kia Telluride which is an extremely popular car. Does the BEV magically burn through its tires faster? No way. In fact, I bet the Tesla gets more miles out of its tires (depending on treadwear rating) because the weight is more evenly distributed towards the center of the car. A Telluride has a ton of weight over the front wheels.

The whole article is written as if gas powered cars do not have any tire and brake related emissions, and that fact is probably lost on many of their readers...which of course is the whole point.

I'll be the first to acknowledge and criticize the excessive weight of BEVs, but this kind of manipulative journalism (and people do understand NY Post as journalism, as much as they shouldn't) is just incredibly damaging to the discourse of...anything and everything.
 
Eunos_Cosmo
A remarkably bad faith article by NY Post...even for them.


Electric vehicles release more toxic emissions, are worse for the environment than gas-powered cars: study




1. North American market cars do not have exhaust filters, and I would bet that the NY Post would come out against them if a mandate for them was seriously proposed.
2. ICE powered cars also have tires and brakes, and many ICE powered cars are heavier than BEVs, particularly the full size SUVs and Trucks that NY Post readers very likely drive.
3. BEVs are often equipped with harder compound tires that wear out more slowly than normal tires



No citation given for brakes wearing out faster on battery powered cars, and its total ******** because EVs primarily use regenerative braking. I wouldn't be surprised if EVs get 2x or more life out of brake pads for equivalent vehicle weight.

A Tesla Model Y weighs up to about 4,500lbs. That's heavy, but it's not more than an ICE-only Kia Telluride which is an extremely popular car. Does the BEV magically burn through its tires faster? No way. In fact, I bet the Tesla gets more miles out of its tires (depending on treadwear rating) because the weight is more evenly distributed towards the center of the car. A Telluride has a ton of weight over the front wheels.

The whole article is written as if gas powered cars do not have any tire and brake related emissions, and that fact is probably lost on many of their readers...which of course is the whole point.

I'll be the first to acknowledge and criticize the excessive weight of BEVs, but this kind of manipulative journalism (and people do understand NY Post as journalism, as much as they shouldn't) is just incredibly damaging to the discourse of...anything and everything.
Click to expand...
You could've just said "NY Post" and I would've understood. I'd legitimately start trusting The Onion to tell the truth before I'd trust that rag. Like, just by looking at the cover of most issues of the NY Post, you'd think it's bunch of juvenile rage-baiting slop that makes TMZ look like The Atlantic.
 
Last edited:
Eunos_Cosmo
A remarkably bad faith article by NY Post...even for them.


Electric vehicles release more toxic emissions, are worse for the environment than gas-powered cars: study




1. North American market cars do not have exhaust filters, and I would bet that the NY Post would come out against them if a mandate for them was seriously proposed.
2. ICE powered cars also have tires and brakes, and many ICE powered cars are heavier than BEVs, particularly the full size SUVs and Trucks that NY Post readers very likely drive.
3. BEVs are often equipped with harder compound tires that wear out more slowly than normal tires



No citation given for brakes wearing out faster on battery powered cars, and its total ******** because EVs primarily use regenerative braking. I wouldn't be surprised if EVs get 2x or more life out of brake pads for equivalent vehicle weight.

A Tesla Model Y weighs up to about 4,500lbs. That's heavy, but it's not more than an ICE-only Kia Telluride which is an extremely popular car. Does the BEV magically burn through its tires faster? No way. In fact, I bet the Tesla gets more miles out of its tires (depending on treadwear rating) because the weight is more evenly distributed towards the center of the car. A Telluride has a ton of weight over the front wheels.

The whole article is written as if gas powered cars do not have any tire and brake related emissions, and that fact is probably lost on many of their readers...which of course is the whole point.

I'll be the first to acknowledge and criticize the excessive weight of BEVs, but this kind of manipulative journalism (and people do understand NY Post as journalism, as much as they shouldn't) is just incredibly damaging to the discourse of...anything and everything.
Click to expand...
Didn't read it, but more tire wear is consistent with what I read elsewhere and quoted from tire companies. It's due to the weight and torque.

www.pcmag.com

The Unexpected Problem With EVs: They 'Tire' Quickly

Electric vehicles go through tires 30% faster than gas-powered vehicles, Bridgestone says, so it developed its first EV-specific replacement tire that protects range and improves durability.
www.pcmag.com www.pcmag.com
 
And EV is not a zero emmision vehicle though.

The production of batteries have quite a substancial impact too.
Although granted still less than a fully petrol car.
 
@ROAD_DOGG33J @p78 You guys are kind of missing the point.

These are perfectly valid criticisms of BEVs, but they can be argued in good faith...that is not what NYP has done.

A more reasonable argument would be something like "BEVs contribute less C02 emissions than ICE powered cars, but environmental concerns remain"

Their actual argument is "BEVs are worse for the environment than ICE powered cars because their brakes and tires produce more particulates than tail pipe emissions from gas powered cars" which is a deeply cynical and disingenuous argument designed to produce an "I TOLD YOU" reaction from mouth breathers...which is wildly successful based on the majority of the comments under the article, who all seem to receive it as gospel.

The point of the article is not to pose the question of how BEVs can be made better, but rather to articulate that they are bad. It's like the wind turbines killing birds. It was never, "well lets figure out how to make the turbines not kill birds", it was "turbines shouldn't exist" because in the end things that represent change deeply concern conservatives because of their very nature and the ultimate goal is to simply prevent change. Unless its the climate. Change that **** all you want.
 
Last edited:
If there's truly a marked increase in tire and brake wear in EVs, I think the world would have heard about it by now.

Battery waste, certainly; but that's balancing those with 2-5 year cycles with those larger rechargeable packs with 8-12 years.
 

Latest Posts

Back