I know MediaBiasFactCheck is not a be-all-end-all to truth/bias in media, but I find it to be a useful resource.

It makes sense to downvote it in posts that have great discussion – let the content rise up so people can have discussions with humans, sure.

But sometimes I see it getting downvoted when it’s the only comment there. Which does nothing, unless a reader has rules that automatically hide downvoted comments (but a reader would be able to expand the comment anyways…so really no difference).

What’s the point of downvoting? My only guess is that there’s people who are salty about something it said about some source they like. Yet I don’t see anyone providing an alternative to MediaBiasFactCheck…

  • Carrolade@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 month 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?

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month 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.

      • Carrolade@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 month ago

        Well, I’m with you that libertarianism is an impractical and harmful idea, most right-leaning positions are. This does not make it far off from our center, though, when the vast majority of things we interact with in the US already are privatized. Many prisons and schools, businesses, land, etc etc. All in the private sector. So, an ideology that wants privatization of what little we have left, like say, the post office, is not a particularly extreme position for our culture. A far more extreme position would be wanting to do away with our voting and implementing an authoritarian government, as Trump seems to want.

        So, there actually is no such thing as some grand, objective scale, no matter what scale you use, attitudes can shift over time and different positions can be adopted or dropped by different points on the scale due to changing technologies, attitudes and situations. The most important thing is that the scale is consistently applied, and provides useful information to the audience. I would argue that the most useful information is provided when the scale is balanced between the various positions that its audience is familiar with. So, again, since its an American organization doing work for an American audience, I think it behoves them to remain accurate to American perceptions.

        It should not be trying to change anyone’s mind, or change how they view the world, simply scale everything that’s out there in a way its audience can find approachable and understandable. It’s not intended to be a reform mechanism, but a service to the culture as the culture exists. This is not whitewashing anymore than the US itself is very whitewashed. But again, it’s not MBFC’s job to fix us, that’s what education is for, not news media or fact/bias checking. It is not an education tool.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          So the points are made up and nothing matters. Got it.

          But about libertarians, you haven’t begun to see what can be privatized. By the time they’re done you’ll be living in housing attached to your job. Unions will be legal but anyone attempting to form one will be murdered. You will be paid in company scrip. Hostile takeover will mean PMCs from your competitor actually taking the factories by force. And the list goes on. If you think libertarians are just after the post office then you’re not paying attention.

          And again. You cannot just declare it’s a US only platform while rating international sources and making that available to international people. That is an international platform by default.

          • Carrolade@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 month ago

            Actually yes, the points are all made up. This is just how human society works. We were not given these ideas by god or something, set into some type of mystical stone. We came up with them all, and we can change them any time we feel like it. It definitely matters though.

            I think you read too much science fiction. Company housing actually used to be a thing in the US, but corporate PMCs invading each others factories is unlikely any time this century.

            I didn’t say it was a US only platform, again, you are saying things I am not saying. What I am saying is that it is a US service, not US-only, simply by-and-for the US and thus from a US perspective. Other people are free to use it or not use it as they see fit.

            • Maggoty@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 month ago

              So you’re inviting people to use it and get information you admit is out of alignment. Got it.

              And yes all of that happened in the 20th century except the PMCs. But once you destroy government, what’s going to stop them? Their natural good will? No you refuted that theory. (“We were not given these ideas by god or something,”)

              I just have to ask, do you work for MBFC? Because you are bending over backwards to defend its ratings.

              • Carrolade@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                1 month ago

                It is not out of alignment with the US in the slightest.

                There you go again with destroying the government, despite that being nowhere in the platform. And when did companies pay with “private scripp” instead of US dollars?

                No, I just don’t like misinformation. You very much do, with your grossly exaggerated claims. I am very unsurprised that any sort of fact checking service deeply bothers you.

                • Maggoty@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 month ago

                  Again. You cannot have it both ways it’s either an international platform or locked down to Americans only. And even then it’s a subjective standard being used, not an objective one. A standard that whitewashes radical conservative rags.

                  It was legal and prevalent until the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. Since then there have been a couple wartime exceptions that were done at a 1 to 1 ratio. Company scrip that was outlawed was never at a one to one ratio.

                  And just because they never use the words “destroy the government” does not mean they won’t do it. The actions they want to take will destroy the government. It’s like when they advocate for the “fair tax”. They know what the results are, they’re just hoping you don’t. (Lookup Brownback Experiment) And libertarians advocate for the complete elimination of the income tax. Not just the deep cuts that Brownback did.

                  These aren’t exaggerated. These are things corporations did in history. And while a factory was never taken over by force, the railroads used force to murder people and clear land for the railroads. We know what happens if you don’t have laws, regulations, and enforcement mechanisms. I’m sorry someone failed to teach you history in school but don’t come in here calling actual history an exaggeration.

                  • Carrolade@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    4
                    ·
                    1 month ago

                    No, it’s actually not that arbitrarily black and white based on nothing more than terminology. As an example, we have MBFC that rates international sources by an American scale. This exists, so clearly it is possible. I also don’t see how it whitewashes conservative rags when it rates them on both accuracy, where many of them do poorly, and categorizes them on the right, where they belong.

                    Yes, they do advocate for drastically reducing the federal government down to basic law enforcement and military. I agree that this is a bad idea. That they want to “destroy the government” if given the chance is a slippery slope argument though. Regardless, the question is how radical it is on the American left/right axis, and these days, it is not particularly. 40 years ago perhaps it was further right.

                    No, you’re very much exaggerating, consistently and across the board. Company scrip was not widespread, it was a feature of mining and logging towns, in an era where our country still ran on resource extraction. Reducing government and destroying government are factually two different things. Companies running around with PMCs is extremely unlikely any time this century. Much like these exaggerations, you ask things like if I’m paid by MBFC, as if they would pay someone to make comments on some tiny, obscure social media platform. You’re a troll, quite clearly. I would not be surprised in the slightest if you come here with your discord buddies just pretending to be a leftist, just to stir up shit and have a good time.