Hello World, As many of you have probably noticed, there is a growing problem on the internet when it comes to undisclosed bias in both amateur and professional reporting. While not every outlet can be like the C-SPAN, or Reuters, we also believe that it’s impossible to remove the human element from the news, especially when it concerns, well, humans.

To this end, we’ve created a media bias bot, which we hope will keep everyone informed about WHO, not just the WHAT of posted articles. This bot uses Media Bias/Fact Check to add a simple reply to show bias. We feel this is especially important with the US Election coming up. The bot will also provide links to Ground.News, as well, which we feel is a great source to determine the WHOLE coverage of a given article and/or topic.

As always feedback is welcome, as this is a active project which we really hope will benefit the community.

Thanks!

FHF / LemmyWorld Admin team 💖

  • AwesomeLowlanderEnglish
    45•4 months ago

    I’m just gonna drop this here as an example:

    The Jerusalem Report (Owned by Jerusalem Post) and the Jerusalem Post

    This biased as shit publication is declared by MBFC as VEEEERY slightly center-right. They make almost no mention of the fact that they cherry pick aspects of the Israel war to highlight, provide only the most favorable context imaginable, yadda yadda. By no stretch of the imagination would these publications be considered unbiased as sources, yet according to MBFC they’re near perfect.

    • @[email protected]English
      29•4 months ago

      Interesting how @Rooki is still a day later active in this post responding to all the comments supporting their bot, but manages to avoid replying to all the legitimate criticisms on display.

      Really shows the mods don’t value feedback, which begs the question why even bother making a thread to get feedback if you’ve already made up your mind.

    • @[email protected]English
      -5•4 months ago

      yet according to MBFC they’re near perfect

      Here are some quotes from the link you posted:

      They often publish factual information that utilizes loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by appealing to emotion or stereotypes) to favor conservative causes. These sources are generally trustworthy for information but may require further investigation.

      After Conrad Black acquired the paper, its political position changed to right-leaning, when Black began hiring conservative journalists and editors. Eli Azur is the current owner of Jerusalem Post. According to Ynetnews, and a Haaretz article, “Benjamin Netanyahu, the Editor in Chief,” in 2017, Azur gave testimony regarding Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s pressure. Current Editor Yaakov Katz was the former senior policy advisor to Naftali Bennett, the former Prime Minister and head of the far-right political party, “New Right.”

      During the 2023 Israel-Hamas conflict, the majority of stories favored the Israeli government, such as this Netanyahu to Hezbollah: If you attack, we’ll turn Beirut into Gaza. In general, the Jerusalem Post holds right-leaning editorial biases and is usually factual in reporting.

      Overall, we rate The Jerusalem Post Right-Center biased based on editorial positions that favor the right-leaning government. We also rate them Mostly Factual for reporting, rather than High due to two failed fact checks.

      Based on MBFC’s methodology, they can’t have more than 6 points (out of 10) toward credibility, which is the floor for high credibility. They’re one lost point from being listed as a medium credibility source, not “near perfect.” They’ve also failed two fact checks in news reporting (not op-ed), which is seriously non-perfect. No one reading that page could walk away thinking that jpost isn’t biased toward both the current Israeli government and conservative causes. MBFC calling them “right-center” is also consistent with how they’re rated just about everywhere else. AllSides rates them as “center” (with a note that community feedback in disagreement believes they “lean right”) and even Wikipedia describes them as “center-right/conservative”.

      What exactly are you angry about here?

        • @[email protected]English
          -8•4 months ago

          Because? You’re angry that they have a methodology? You’re angry that they’re basing it on the paper as a whole and not solely on their coverage of Gaza?

          Because they’re in agreement with you. When someone posts a Jerusalem Post story about Gaza, MBFC is saying “this source is heavily biased toward the Israeli government.” Even if their coverage is factual, you’re not getting the full context of what’s happening in the conflict.