Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Wednesday, January 29, 2020

We are the most comprehensive media bias resource on the internet. There are currently 3000+ media sources listed in our database and growing every day. Don't be fooled by Fake News sources. Use the search feature above (Header) to check the bias of any source. Use name or url



Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Telling that it only took AngryDork 4 years to find Corky's go-to STS backup link. Let's take a look at what credible journalism sources say about it:

The Columbia Journalism Review describes Media Bias/Fact Check as an amateur attempt at categorizing media bias and Van Zandt as an "armchair media analyst." In response, Van Zandt describes himself as someone with "more than 20 years as an arm chair researcher on media bias and its role in political influence."

The Poynter Institute notes, "Media Bias/Fact Check is a widely cited source by the Left for news stories and even studies about misinformation, despite the fact that its method is in no way scientific or even accurate."

#1 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2020-01-29 10:45 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"despite the fact that its method is in no way scientific or even accurate."

Funny AF, considering the source!
Poynter Institute

In 2019, Poynter used various "fake news" databases (including those curated by the Annenberg Public Policy Center, Merrimack College, PolitiFact, and Snopes) to compile a list of over 515 news websites that it labeled "unreliable." Poynter called on advertisers to "blacklist" the sites on the list. The list included conservative news websites such as the Washington Examiner, The Washington Free Beacon, and The Daily Signal. After backlash, Poynter retracted the list, citing "weaknesses in the methodology."[13] Poynter issued a statement saying "We regret that we failed to ensure that the data was rigorous before publication, and apologize for the confusion and agitation caused by its publication."

#2 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-01-29 11:06 PM | Reply


Is that all you got, a retraction by the Poynter Institute in Wikipedia where they admitted that they didn't rigorously vet their data on a fake news "blacklist"? I know that Wikipedia is your go to source but really?

TFF, now do the Columbia Journalism Review!

#3 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2020-01-30 02:29 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2020 World Readable

Drudge Retort