No comments or anything, just lots of Downvotes.

  • AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Where anyone puts the “center” of the political spectrum is arbitrary and ultimately irrelevant. What we should still be able to expect is that it gets the ordering of sources correct—i.e., it doesn’t label Source A as being to the left of Source B if it’s actually to the right. And that relative ordering is still useful, as long as we bear in mind that the actual labels are otherwise arbitrary.

    • Womble@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      They (MBFC) explicitly state that they rate sources as more credible the closer the sources are to their arbitrarily selected centre.

      • jonne@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        33
        ·
        3 months ago

        Which is ridiculous. If Democracy Now or ProPublica take great pains to get all their facts right (which they do), and the New York Post regularly outright makes shit up, they’re marked as equally reliable based on that metric, because they’re supposedly an equal distance away from the centre.

      • AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        Definitely—so sources that are close together when projected onto a left-right axis may be far apart in a more multidimensional political space. But the relative ordering along that axis can still be accurate, even if the implied proximity isn’t.

        • ℍ𝕂-𝟞𝟝@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          The assumes that the US Democrat-Republican spectrum is indeed a straight line in that space, and they are diametrically opposed.