Hi-res:
this post was submitted on 19 Aug 2026
108 points (99.1% liked)
Slop.
907 readers
332 users here now
For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target federated instances' admins or moderators.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I first saw this chart probably like ten years ago. I remember I looked at the methodology and it was basically lets take a set of "media experts" from ostensibly different political viewpoints and have them rate each source on both factuality and on political bias.
It was immediately obvious to me that a self-proclaimed right-winger is extremely unlikely to rate a source as biased far-left but not misleading at all, and vice-versa for a self-proclaimed left-winger, so the methodology meant it was pretty much a foregone conclusion that we end up with a chart that nicely shows that the more factual reporting is, the more likely it will be directly in the center.