Re:Facebook reverses on paid influencers after Bloomberg memes
by paulgb on Friday February 14, 2020 @03:36PM
(#22330145)
I mostly get my news from paywalled sites, which I find less pushy on their own biases than Vox and Fox and other free sites. The bias is never completely gone, but it seems that sites that don't have to compete for social media shares are better incentivized to find the truth instead of creating it.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Facebook reverses on paid influencers after Bloomberg memes
by keiferski on Friday February 14, 2020 @03:40PM
(#22330172)
That is probably true. WSJ does have its biases of course, but I have also found them to be reasonably fair with most things, probably because there are legitimate business interests and real money relying on their information, rather than just clicks and “influence.”
Re:Facebook reverses on paid influencers after Bloomberg memes
by paulgb on Friday February 14, 2020 @03:47PM
(#22330239)
I think what's most telling is the twin study of WSJ and Fox. They both feed up into News Corp, so the top-down institutional biases are the same, and yet one is respected and the other is not.
Re:Facebook reverses on paid influencers after Bloomberg memes
by big_chungus on Friday February 14, 2020 @05:22PM
(#22330983)
WSJ isn't biased overall: https://www.allsides.com/news-source/wall-street-journal-med...
The editorials are sometimes right-leaning, but mostly fiscally so.