this post was submitted on 18 Sep 2023
67 points (95.9% liked)

Asklemmy

42493 readers
1398 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Except politics of course. We all know everyone else is wrong.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 6 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

Honestly, I'd be more curious what topics where the media does nail the nuances of. Are there any at all?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago

I guess it depends what one calls "the media". Something like IEEE Spectrum is top notch for tech news. Reuters and AP generally are pretty good for normal news. Past that, maybe something like The Conversation?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

I wasn’t really referring to nuances as those are pretty difficult to expect to get right. As long as the general idea is correctly portrayed then it’s reasonably good journalism.

Im talking mostly about clickbait/ragebait BS. Sometimes critical information is intentionally omitted or inaccurately portrayed just to get more clicks on the article. Often times the article itself even contradicts the headline.

One example was an article making rounds in the UK months ago where some flooding had totaled some electrical components in a car. All the headlines said “Electric vehicle receives thousands in damages from a few inches of water” or some variation of it on a few dozen news sites. Each one had long comment chains about how electric cars are going to kill us all and are completely useless to everyone. The car in question was actually an early-2010s diesel.

Or “Self-Driving Tesla slams in to firetruck”. When the Tesla involved in the incident was a 2014 Model S. Which wasn’t equipped with self-driving tech.

Or the recent mozilla foundation article where they say that cars are “Monitoring facial expressions” when what it actually means is that the car is using infrared cameras to make sure the driver’s eyes are on the road.