(no subject)

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Comments

[madam-shapo.livejournal.com]

Opinion pieces have value, but they must be a supplement to news not a replacement for it.
Who says they are?

Any popularly watched 'news' outlet that leaves it's watchers less informed than people who don't watch news at all.
Just because you read it somewhere doesn't mean it's true. Have you ever see the questions in the polls? Those could be really biased. I remember, recently I yelled at one of this pollster and hang up in a rage. The question was formulated the way that whatever answer I picked would be against my beliefs.

If you don't agree with my definition of biased, then I might seem biased to you, because your center is left to me. But then you have to agree that your center might be biased and you would never know. In your definition, if I understand correctly, there is no absolute zero that we can start the count, it is only an opinion.
I watch whatever I watch. I am mature enough to make right judgment, without being subject to influence. Also, I was exposed to a variety of ideologies - seen from different prospective. By the way, couple years ago I was watching all the other networks equally. But now they are so ridiculous that I can't stand them more then 5 minutes.
And again, I have no problem with any ideology, what is not acceptable to me is the dishonesty.

[wight1984.livejournal.com]

"Who says they are?"

You did: "Most of the people on Fox are opinion journalists"

"Just because you read it somewhere doesn't mean it's true"

I choose that specific source because it was a source that you deemed reliable enough to use as a source in a previous comment.

"But then you have to agree that your center might be biased and you would never know."

Everyone is biased. The issue isn't 'which of us is biased' but 'which of us acknowledges and compensates for bias'.

There's a variation on the golden rule that I like: 'Treat everyone 10% better than they treat you to compensate for subjective error'. The idea is that by acknowledging your own bias in how you think, you can become fair and unbiased in how you behave.

People who don't acknowledge their own bias can't be trusted to properly compensate for it.

"I watch whatever I watch. I am mature enough to make right judgment, without being subject to influence."

This is the same kind of naivety that leads people to say "I'm not influenced by advertising" despite all the evidence that pretty much everyone is.

If you don't think that you're influenced by media then you're exactly the sort of person most likely to be influenced by it. If you don’t acknowledge that it’s happening, you can’t question yourself about it after the fact.

[madam-shapo.livejournal.com]

We going in circles now. Again, your 10% compensation can still be more bias then my 0%. That is why I think my idea of comparing to the reality is better way to deal with this issue.
Don't you think that some people are more influenced by advertisement then others?