politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
ABC News Media Bias Fact Check Credibility: [High] (Click to view Full Report)
Check the bias and credibility of this article on Ground.News
Thanks to Media Bias Fact Check for their access to the API.
Please consider supporting them by donating.
Footer
Beep boop. This action was performed automatically. If you dont like me then please block me.💔
If you have any questions or comments about me, you can make a post to LW Support lemmy community.
People who downvote instead of (or as well as) blocking it. Why the downvotes? You don't want to see a bias/factual rating of the source or you don't agree with the rating?
I don't agree with the ratings. Fox News gets a "medium" which puts it on the same ground as a lot of actual news sites. There's no way that should get anything more than a "low" or something below that.
I can't tell how they're determined other than a singular brief mention of one thing, so to me it looks like they made the call based on one event they cherry picked. But really, it doesn't matter though to me to investigate any group that rates fox news so highly. I've had to suffer through their bullshit lies for years and find them responsible for a lot of the partisan damage we've seen over the decades. Medium? What the fuck does it take to get a low rating?
The bot seems to use the medibiasfactcheck.com's API which should report 'mixed' factual reporting with extreme right bias.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/fox-news-bias/
edit:
seems like there is more data available, the bot could report the
MBFC Credibility Ratingas well.edit2: I was looking for a fox rating by that bot, I wasn't able to find one "in the wild" but it seems like it does use the MBFC rating for the heading and does indeed classify fox as "Low"
Example from what I guess is the guys development teating posts: https://lemmy.world/post/18064796
A lot of people confuse Fox’s talking heads/opinion content with their newsroom. The actual news stuff isn’t that bad, it’s the pundits who are just outright liars.
It doesn’t help that they don’t do a clear job of distinguishing these, but they are distinct in quality.
Fox News is an "entertainment network" per their own lawyers, so I will never take them seriously.
Plus regardless of content, they played a BIG role into the whole "elections were stolen" bullshit.
Again, I believe that argument was made regarding their opinion content. But feel free to correct me if I’m misremembering.
The company as a whole is trash but they do some OK reporting at times. If you recall there was a major controversy in 2020 because their newsroom accurately called the election for Biden fairly early and their viewers went apeshit.
I haven't down voted it, but I have seen people questioning the credibility of the bot's creator. Maybe has something to do with it. I didn't care enough to read the details myself though.
edit: after actually looking at the bot provided info for the first time rather than scrolling past it, I think it should also try to include info like who owns the news outlet and what else they own.
The creator says that they use the mediabiasfactcheck.com's API and looking at their page it doesn't seem like that info is readily available but maybe they will take a feature request to try to add that info.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/abc-news/
It's just noise to me. Though I don't downvote it, I enjoy watching it being downvoted.