Asklemmy

43945 readers

577 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

248

Veritasium's new video on Jumping Spiders is having its sponsor Better Help on blast in the top comments. Should we hold content creators to account? (discuss.tchncs.de)

submitted 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) by dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

139 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Should we stop supporting them with our eyes for taking sponsorships from shady companies?

Edit: I took my first step and unsubscribed from the channel and I will continue to withhold my viewership to those that don’t take better care of the viewers.

Likely doesn’t matter, but I’m on a roll of not giving my money to companies that are immoral so why not do the same with my eyes.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] MindTraveller@lemmy.ca 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

surely a system that gives you news from so many sources will be less biased than sticking to just one or two sources

Not really. Suppose I show you one article that says vaccines don't cause autism. Now suppose I show you that one article, and 99 articles that say they do cause autism. Which one is giving you a more accurate view of the facts? Obviously, including more lies and misinformation will not reduce the amount of bias.

[–] Analog@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

The point is to show different biases through their source’s own interpretation of facts, not to deliver unbiased news themselves.

Put another way, Ground News is kinda saying “here are some cold days, hot days, and in-between days. This is what we experience.” You’re sitting there saying “they’re liars! Have you forgotten 0 degrees kelvin and the center of the sun?!?”

We haven’t forgotten but it’s not the point. Moreover if they changed their scale to show the modern left is not really left wing at all, then they would not be representing what we’re seeing, and critically, they would not be shareable as a demonstration of bias in news. Because most people would dismiss them as propaganda without really digging in.

[–] MindTraveller@lemmy.ca 0 points 5 months ago

Well see that's the problem. They're lying to gain mass appeal. They're calling liberals leftists and participating in the move of the Overton window in America towards fascism. That's bad. You figured out the problem all by yourself, you didn't need me to explain it for you.