It’s not really a bot’s opinion though? It’s reporting on salon in general, and letting you know that the reporting has a bias, which means generally, it might promote parts of the story that show Vance in a bad light compared to other reporting, and the. The Ground News link shows that reporting on this topic across several sources tends to be pretty non biased and factual. That’s all good information to have, and saying otherwise means you want to let yourself be misled.
And everything other than joining the topic and the source is written by humans who are trying to keep people informed.
I mean, it’s pulling from MBFC and ground news, which are not both owned by Dave Van Zandt, and he doesn’t work alone. Also, when compared to other fact checking organizations, MBFC performs well, from what I’ve read. Well enough that if you find their output uncomfortable, you should be second guessing yourself.
Salon - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for Salon:
Search topics on Ground.News
https://www.salon.com/2024/09/05/jd-vance-says-school-are-a-fact-of-life/?in_brief=true
Media Bias Fact Check | bot support
If you’re down voting a fact checker, you might want to do some self reflection on why you’re upset that Salon doesn’t have a perfect rating
If you can’t tell the difference between a “fact” and the random opinion of some bot, you might want to do some self reflection in general.
It’s not really a bot’s opinion though? It’s reporting on salon in general, and letting you know that the reporting has a bias, which means generally, it might promote parts of the story that show Vance in a bad light compared to other reporting, and the. The Ground News link shows that reporting on this topic across several sources tends to be pretty non biased and factual. That’s all good information to have, and saying otherwise means you want to let yourself be misled.
And everything other than joining the topic and the source is written by humans who are trying to keep people informed.
It’s the opinion of one person.
I mean, it’s pulling from MBFC and ground news, which are not both owned by Dave Van Zandt, and he doesn’t work alone. Also, when compared to other fact checking organizations, MBFC performs well, from what I’ve read. Well enough that if you find their output uncomfortable, you should be second guessing yourself.