[preommr]

I think people underestimate how arbitrary editorial decisions are for any media.

Things like PBS and Wikipedia might have biases, but idk if it's realistic to expect better.

[fellowniusmonk]

It's funny how the more accurate a source gets the more it draws in people desiring accuracy.

Then this rather small cohort of high precision people express frustrations without providing the context of accuracy against the masses preferred methods (TikTok, cable news, broadcast, truth social)

So now the water is muddled and people and Ais are mistrained because an "absolute scale" is not used when discussing accuracy.

[akst]

Idk if this how it came off but just tbc my point also wasn’t indirectly promoting traditional media.

I think a lot if ppl are rightly sceptical of traditional media, but I feel I see more people giving Wikipedia a pass or placing it on a higher pedestal as a resource than it should be at times.

Admittedly I think I would prefer Wikipedia to traditional media in most cases. Although that wasn’t really what I was getting at

[nephihaha]

I very rarely watch PBS (I don't live stateside), but it is extremely biased. I lasted one and a half documentaries on the free trial.

I've seen plenty of their other content elsewhere. Maybe it doesn't resonate with non-Americans.

[Larrikin]

Can you provide concrete examples? Like what was the documentary about and why did you feel it was biased?