Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by PittleyDunkin 596 days ago
> There should be clear and concise standards media outlets need to adhere to

Yea that's be great but it's never going to happen, and if it did happen you wouldn't like it. It's like people wanting unbiased journalism: that only exists in the minds of the people who think there are only two serious opinions to have on any topic.
1 comments
partomniscient 595 days ago
It does happen - sometimes get we unbiased journalism. Just not from 'professional' journalists.

In response to an article posted in the global news thread on reddit, someone who lives there and actually has local knowledge and context can click 'reply' and explain what's actually going on and contradict/correct what the clickbaity sensationalist mass media article contains.

For example, I live here, the government is passing trying to pass said law that they can't control the implementation of. It's also seen by some as a surveillance state move under the guise of "won't someone think of the children". Under the proposed rules, theoretically people < 16 won't even be allowed to text one another.

More in depth/informative article from a local source, not Reuters:

[1] https://www.thenewdaily.com.au/news/politics/australian-poli...

link
ImPostingOnHN 595 days ago
That link seems like the opposite of unbiased journalism, and also the title quotes someone as having called it a ‘deeply flawed plan’ but upon closer inspection, seems to be quoting the opinion of the author themself!.
link
partomniscient 594 days ago
At a fundamental aspect, that's what journalism is though - some individual noticing something and writing down what they percieved, its always biased. To think otherwise is ludicrous.

The linked article is way more informative and in depth compared to the link in the original HN post.

link
ImPostingOnHN 594 days ago
The linked post seems to spend all its time advocating for one position without taking even a moment, much less equal time, to even explain the other position.
link
partomniscient 594 days ago
WTF is people's obsession with the 'other position'. Sometimes there is no other position. It's just people complaining that someones opinion doesn't align with theirs.

An apple tree has 2 apples on it. It's a fact. There is no 'other position'. So sick of narrow-minded idiots/bigots. The article I linked to has way more factual information than the Reuters one.

The government is trying to legislate something it can't control. The whole situation is stupid.

link
ImPostingOnHN 594 days ago
These are also facts:

- The post in question is about legislation which has opinions on at least 2 sides: for it or against it.

- The post in question openly advocated for 1 of the sides while effectively ignoring the others. It's not more informative, it's just someone announcing a lot of their opinions. Their opinions aren't additional information, and thus are not informative.

- Someone disagreeing with you doesn't make them obsessed or narrow-minded or a bigot.

> The government is trying to legislate something it can't control

This suggests that you consider unbiased journalism to be journalism which agrees with you. That's the outside perspective from someone who, unlike you, doesn't feel one way or the other on the legislation in question (it doesn't affect me).

link