• @davelA
    link
    English
    323 months ago

    We’ve known this was a US-backed coup for nearly a decade. The story has been beaten to death, just not on corporate media.

    .
    Our government and our corporate media fed us a load of bullshit about it being an organic “color revolution” for “freedom and democracy.” It’s standard operating procedure: The blueprint of regime change operations

    • Alaskaball [comrade/them]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      493 months ago

      Anyone that tells you they’re “neutral” or “unbiased” is a fucking liar.

      Everyone has a bias, and if you believe otherwise you’re either gullible or a propagandist.

    • @brain_in_a_box
      link
      433 months ago

      Well it’s certainly a more neutral site than mediabiasfactcheck.

    • ‘questionable news sites like RT’ C’mon man. The hells this bullshit. Yall so propagandized that anything to the left of let’s nuke Iran is ‘far-left’

      Seriously tho get non US media. The corporate media in the US will say anything is 'not credible ’ if it contradicts the powers that be. Babies from incubators in Iraq? Remember that? From the 'totally credible ’ US media establishment

    • Infamousblt [any]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      383 months ago

      Look at this person who thinks that media fact check is somehow unbiased themselves. Here I think we have a picture of them in our emoji store: clown-to-clown-communication

    • Maoo [none/use name]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      283 months ago

      There is no such thing as neutral. That site is a good example of it: they’re personally highly biased towards “centrist” liberal positions to the point that they conflate it with writing “just the facts”. They have no consistent methodology, they’re just showing you their own inability to detect bullshit when it’s something they agree with.

      For example, as it has often done in its history, The New York Times has been carrying water for fascistic settler colonial narratives, including hiring an obvious racist to write implausible articles about alleged sexual assaults by Hamas on October 7. Articles contested by the people interviewed, the families and friends of those who died. They censored their own attempts to admit fault and their workers creating media about the errors. Only in the last week have they fired the author in question, which will surely be used to imply that this is the only thing wrong with their consistently biased coverage that focuses almost exclusively on interviewing state department officials, Zionist NGOs, and Israeli government officials.

      Did you find any of that on “media bias fact check”? Did it rank the NYT lower than The Gray Zone on its ability to report factually? For having a Zionist bias? Even this one example I’ve provided is far more damning than anything you’ve listed.

      You can’t outsource media criticism, you have to do it yourself and engage with it.

    • @zephyreksM
      link
      273 months ago

      Dave Van Zandt is a registered Non-Affiliated voter who values evidence-based reporting. Since High School (a long time ago), Dave has been interested in politics and noticed as a kid the same newspaper report in two different papers was very different in their tone. This curiosity led him to pursue a Communications Degree in college; however, like most 20-year olds he didn’t know what he wanted and changed to a Physiology major midstream. Dave has worked in the healthcare industry (Occupational Rehabilitation) since graduating from college but never lost the desire to learn more about bias and its impacts.

      The combination of being fascinated by politics, a keen eye to spot bias before he even knew what it was called, and an education/career in science gave Dave the tools required for understanding Media Bias and its implications. This led to a 20-year journey where Dave would read anything and everything he could find on media bias and linguistics. He also employed the scientific method to develop a methodology to support his assessments.

      If you’re going to discredit a source, please try to do the legwork of actually discrediting it. A guy with a Bachelors in Physiology and being “fascinated with politics since high school (a long time ago)” cannot be considered a reliable source, nevermind one who claims to follow the “scientific method” which he, presumably, learned while studying to become an occupational therapist or through his 20-year journey of reading political news.

      If you have photos of this man, any record of interviews with him, records that support his credibility/the incorporation of his company, records of his job in occupational rehabilitation, details about his team, or anything else, please feel free to share them. Please do not confuse him with Dave E. Van Zandt (Princeton BA Sociology, Yale JD, London School of Economics PhD, ex-managing editor of the Yale Law Journal, ex-Dean of Northeastern’s School of Law, ex-President of The New School).

      • Maoo [none/use name]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        183 months ago

        There’s no reason a random dude with a bachelor’s in physiology can’t be good at media criticism. It’s not like the big nerds that go into journalism or join think tanks are beacons of truth. Media criticism is about flexing your skeptical and investigative muscles and being highly informed about the topics in question so that you can do the hardest thing in it: identify what was left out, what was neglected, and what articles were not written instead of what is before you.

        That said, this particular random dude physiology major is not good at media criticism.

        • @zephyreksM
          link
          73 months ago

          Thing is, even if he is good at media criticism, there’s no stakes for him. Nobody knows who he is, what he looks like, he has nothing on the line, and his credibility in his primary occupation cannot be harmed if he is wrong.

          Nevermind that he lacks the credentials nor any legitimate scientific expertise, and yet claims that his Bachelor’s in Physiology was sufficiently advanced to teach him everything he needs to know about the scientific process.

    • Egon [they/them]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      243 months ago

      I hope you’re aware that “objective”, “unbiased”, “neutral” journalism is a myth and a complete impossibility. Any reporting on reality requires that the reporter takes a stance on how to report that reality. While some news sources are completely untrustworthy (Radio Free Asia for example) you should not believe ANY news source is ever unbiased. You should remain sceptical no matter what you read, and instead of blindly consuming the “good” news media, you should instead attempt to independently verify the claims made.
      Remaining sceptical means looking into things yourself instead of going to mediabiasfactcheck.com lol.

      This article is completely fine, it’s not writing falsehoods or making up shit, nor is it in any way any more opinionated than your average mainstream drivel - it’s just negatively opinioned on groups that larger news media is supportive of.