I don't have any claims on people not agreeing with me. I have claims on me not understanding what's going on. I think if such a tool as I proposed existed, I would be happy to use it.
Hosts Adam and John present national and global issues as portrayed by mass media, and systematically DECONSTRUCT the stories. They not only highlight biases, but explore propagandistic elements and discuss how the media intentionally affects the consumers.
Most importantly, they work to identify the MOTIVATIONS for medias' biases in the first place, and demonstrate for their listeners how to be much more critical, skeptical, and analytical in the way they consume the news.
Listen to a few episodes and you might rethink the need for building a tool at all.
But this dissemination of information by identifying biases of the entities involved is a tactic that can be used by anyone. Objective thinking belongs to everyone, doesn't it?
> I am not interested in unbiased news sources.
So, which is it? I think the focus on bias vs unbiased news sources is a distraction. ALL news is biased. That is something that will never change.
> If others cannot understand our opinion
What if the issue here is that others understand your opinion perfectly, but still disagree with it? This whole conversation is starting to sound a lot like you want a tool that will magically make people agree with you.