Bezos Tries to Defend the Indefensible

#5 | Posted by JeffJ

Are you, or are you not, the Drudge Retort poster known as JeffJ, who was thrown off of the Retort and had to come crawling back as "Bellringer"?

Are you brave enough to respond?

Or, are you just a typical MAGA coward?

(JeffJ has me plonked. So, while he can't see my posts, I can see his. And everyone else can see this response... but he can't! Which means he won't respond, making him look like he really is JeffJ! - lather, rinse, repeat...)

Trust in the media is at historic all time low. He is smart to try to change course.

Here ya go. Take a look and see if you can figure it out:
today.yougov.com

"Bezos Tries to Defend the Indefensible"

Just like our Stinkerbell!

Washington Post cancellations hit 250,000 - 10% of subscribers

amp.theguardian.com

What Bezos failed to take into consideration is, Republicans don't read newspapers. Preferring to get all their information from X and Facebook memes.

Canceled. Account deleted.

Just like Fakebook Xitter and Tic Tok.

Your Bad Guy AI algorithms will just have to find another way to get to me.

Americans continue to register record-low trust in the mass media, with 31% expressing a "great deal" or "fair amount" of confidence in the media to report the news "fully, accurately and fairly," similar to last year's 32%. Americans' trust in the media -- such as newspapers, television and radio -- first fell to 32% in 2016 and did so again last year.

For the third consecutive year, more U.S. adults have no trust at all in the media (36%) than trust it a great deal or fair amount. Another 33% of Americans express "not very much" confidence.

-Gallup

"Gallup first asked this question in 1972 and has measured it in most years since 1997. In three readings in the 1970s, trust ranged from 68% to 72%, yet by Gallup's next readings in the late 1990s and early 2000s, smaller majorities of 51% to 55% trusted the news media."

Old people loved being spoon fed news. They just bicker over the source.

Everybody that's not old... that's something else.

"For the third consecutive year, more U.S. adults have no trust at all in the media (36%) than trust it a great deal or fair amount. Another 33% of Americans express "not very much" confidence."

That's by design.

"For the third consecutive year, more U.S. adults have no trust at all in the media (36%) than trust it a great deal or fair amount. Another 33% of Americans express "not very much" confidence."

Babblefish Translation-

64% trust it a great deal
77% have confidence

Let's see 36%and 33%. Those numbers seem familiar.

Ah yes. Here it is. That's basically the same size as Trumpy's rabid base.

That's by design.

#13 | POSTED BY SCHIFFERBRAINS

20-30 years of hateful propaganda and calling them the enemy of the people and the enemy within apparently has had some effect.

64% trust it a great deal

#14 | Posted by donnerboy at 2024-10-29 04:38 PM | Reply | Flag:

31% trust it a great deal, or fair amount.
33% do not have a great deal, nor fair amount, aka a low amount of trust
36% have zero trust in it.

That's abysmal, but that's what you get with ad driven news.

Pretending the 31% and 33% are similar and adding them together is the kind of thing a shady news outlet for partisans would do.

That's abysmal, but that's what you get with ad driven news.
#16 | Posted by sitzkrieg

But ad driven news has had better numbers, no?

My guess is the news has grown into political propaganda at this point.

There are unbiased news sites, but each side denigrates them as unreliable sources.

#18 | POSTED BY ONEIRONAUT

Welcome to the Information Age and the influence of AI algorithms.

You think you think independently? Ha! You think that AI dominating humans is way off into the future? ha!

We are all already being influenced and even controlled by AI algorithms.

Happy extinction!!

The "Singularity" cannot be stopped.

Pretending the 31% and 33% are similar and adding them together is the kind of thing a shady news outlet for partisans would do.

#17 | POSTED BY SITZKRIEG

I was trying to figure out what those numbers really meant.

Throwing random stats out there from 20 years ago with no sources or verified studies for us to refer to so one could try and understand what those stats really mean is exactly what a right wing partisan news outlet would do.

250,000 cancellations
at a minimum of $120/year

$30,000,000 per year (at a minimum)

@#18 ... There are unbiased news sites ...

Care to post a list of some of them?

@#22

OK, in response to the apparent crickets, I'll post this link...

Interactive Media Bias Chart
adfontesmedia.com

One thing i notice from that chart is that the site The Hill now seems to be in the ~slightly left~ area, rather than the ~slightly right~ area it had been placed.

Why is that?

Is The Hill eschewing the current GOP lies?

Is that media bias chart now showing that in order to be right-leaning a site has to embrace the Republican lies?

fwiw ...

Methodology
adfontesmedia.com

...
Q: How, exactly, do your analysts rate articles and episodes?

We have a team of over 60 analysts rating articles and episodes all day, every day. In our current process, we rate most articles during live shifts (on Zoom) with three analysts (one left, one right, one center), and after each article, analysts see each other's scores and resolve discrepancies when possible. If significant discrepancies remain, the articles are rerated by a second balanced panel.

The type of rating we ask each analyst to provide is an overall coordinate ranking on the chart (i.e., "40, -12"). The rating methodology is rigorous and rule-based. There are many specific factors we take into account for both reliability and bias because there are many measurable indicators of each. The main ones for Reliability are defined metrics we call "Expression," "Veracity," and "Headline/Graphic," and the main ones for Bias are ones we call "Political Position," "Language," and "Comparison." There are several other factors we consider for certain articles. Therefore, the ratings are not simply subjective opinion polling, but rather methodical content analysis. Overall source ratings are composite weighted ratings of the individual article and show scores.

We continue to refine our methodology as we discover ways to have analysts classify rating factors more consistently. Our analysts use our software platform called CART"Content Analysis Rating system.

Educators and individuals can learn how to rate news articles like Ad Fontes Media. Our courses include detailed video and written explanations of the factors we use to rate articles. ...