• @grue
    link
    English
    779 days ago

    Towards the appearance of neutrality, you mean. When person A says “2+2=4” and person B says “2+2=5”, “neutrality” is not reporting some kind of false compromise at 4 1/2, but instead factually reporting that person A is correct and person B is wrong!

    • Diplomjodler
      link
      33
      edit-2
      8 days ago

      Stop oppressing me with your woke math and shit! It’s my deeply held belief that two plus two equals five!

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          98 days ago

          We jest about bad math being called heritage, but remember that, sadly, 3/5 = 1 was unironically a huge part of their heritage.

      • @Eldritch
        link
        English
        79 days ago

        For large values of 2 it can even approach 6.

        • Diplomjodler
          link
          38 days ago

          You’re very good at conservative math.

          • @Eldritch
            link
            English
            48 days ago

            Heh well conservatives are irrational, but then again. Sometimes numbers are too. But 2.999999999999 + 2.9999999999 is pretty darn close to 3.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      239 days ago

      I feel like the media would roll this out in the most bad-faith and then evolve it in the most malignant way possible:

      • Both candidates discuss 2+2
      • Person B passionately argues values on 2+2
      • Is person A too ingrained in the establishment to consider new ideas on 2+2?
      • Person B campaign staff says person B will likely “soften tone on 2+2” after they win election
      • Person B supporters wear “5” to latest rally
      • Experts weigh in on the true meaning of 4 1/2
      • Person B says “4 is low-energy just like person A”
      • Should a 4-believer really be president just because person B is a rapist and a felon?
      • Person B won the election and it’s all your fault
      • @aesthelete
        link
        9
        edit-2
        8 days ago

        They write completely content-less headlines and articles that are so “neutral” they look like they were written by an extraterrestrial attorney.

        Guy A shoots guy B with a gun and they write it up as “spectators allege that the bullet that happened to strike B may likely have originated from the barrel of a gun that A has been said to have held in or around the same period where B happened to be struck”.

        I took journalism in high school and the instruction at the time was not to use the fucking passive voice…but that’s all the motherfuckers use…even when covering extremely high stakes shit.

    • @starchylemming
      link
      27 days ago

      2+2 is actually 5 I’ve read it in a book with a bunch of numbers as a title. its basic knowledge, just like: War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength

    • @ceenote
      link
      -18
      edit-2
      9 days ago

      You’re confusing neutrality with objectivity.

      Edit: Neutral (adjective): not helping or supporting either side in a conflict, disagreement, etc.

      Are you a big enough baby to downvote because you don’t like what words mean? Neutrality and correctness are two different things. Objectivity does factor in what the facts are, neutrality doesn’t.

      • @grue
        link
        English
        219 days ago

        Perpetuating lies just because one side claims them is neither neutral nor objective!

        • Ech
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -28 days ago

          It is absolutely neutral. You’re mixing up neutrality with equivalence. Just because a neutral party reports on something that’s clearly incorrect doesn’t mean they are sponsoring or supporting it over something else, nor is it saying they are equally valid claims.

          The purpose of neutral reporting is to have a record of what happened, not to judge it right or wrong. Unfortunately, sometimes (a lot of the time, nowadays) noteworthy events involve unpleasant and/or malicious actors, but we can’t just shun them from history because their purposes are ignoble.