you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] -6 points 1 year ago (8 children)

Those articles are clearly written in such a way their bias doesn't show (that was sarcasm btw).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    These articles that disagree with me are clearly biased… against me.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [+] -6 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    Cool, keep making stuff up. If facts were important to you you'd know that it's not biased against me, just the authors are clearly biased lol

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    I’m not sure you even know what “bias” means, nor do you understand that there’s no such thing as an “unbaised” author.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    I do. Looks at the words chosen to write the article. There is a lot of emotion behind the words chosen, I know what an unbiased author would be, while everyone conveys emotion to a certain extent, when the entire article is written that way, it's easy to tell the bias.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago* (3 children)
    1. As if you’d actually read the articles.
    2. And when it isn’t written that way, it’s harder to tell the bias. When the NYT “neutralizes” language regarding the Palestinian genocide, is it removing its bias or obscuring it?
    3. Your media literacy could use improvement.
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I opened your links and perused what was written. And when things are written factually there is less bias. Those wors used by NYT show bias, not facts. I'm not the only one here who needs to improve their media litteracy

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments