top | item 43540302

(no title)

ThalesX | 11 months ago

I think I understand this feature pretty well. What I'm arguing for is taking the common information between all news sources (without having to place them in left / right / center) is much higher signal to noise.

Honestly your paranthesis that "the right is way worse" is already too political for my taste. It makes me feel dumb for even writing this reply. Alas, these are my thoughts. News should be news. What happened and when. Not some attack vector against a group of people or another.

discuss

order

alwa|11 months ago

Given that there are at least as many things happening as there are humans, how do you suggest the people serving as “news sources” avoid editorial judgment when deciding what’s newsworthy and what it means?

ThalesX|11 months ago

I don't suggest they avoid editorial judgement. I'm only interested in what happened so that I can draw my own conclusions.

HelloMcFly|11 months ago

> What happened and when.

"What" is often a matter of definition and framing, especially if you also want news to include "to what effect" which is not always black-and-white. "Why" is an answer that also must be answered, but will often come through a political lens. News cannot be free from a political lens if "why" and "to what effect" are considered, and probably can't be free from some element of a political lens even if just sticking to "what".

ThalesX|11 months ago

> if you also want news to include "to what effect"

I don't. I want to be able to draw my own conclusion as to the effect of what happened might be.

> News cannot be free from a political lens if "why" and "to what effect" are considered, and probably can't be free from some element of a political lens even if just sticking to "what".

I have no interest in the "why" and "to what effect". I have an interest into "what" so that I can draw my own conclusions.

Though thank you for your thoughts, it helps me understand the people calling for political sides better.

ropable|11 months ago

> Honestly your paranthesis that "the right is way worse" is already too political for my taste.

They're not wrong, though.