Inventing Reality

747 readers

123 users here now

When the media decides who you are rooting for.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml

335

Ms Rachel: "Stop killing kids." The Guardian: "that's controversial" (lemmy.ml)

submitted 2 days ago by yogthos@lemmy.ml to c/ManufacturingConsent@lemmy.ml

42 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Senal@programming.dev 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

They might not be injecting it directly , but they certainly surface it by omission/language choice.

Like saying the UK "commandeered" or "retrieved" a boat or transport , but would say "hijacked", "stole" or "pirated" for a demographics they didn't particularly favour at that time.

You should be paying attention to the omissions and the choice of language overall, because that's where the bias is (usually).

[–] FinjaminPoach@lemmy.world -4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Like saying the UK “commandeered” or “retrieved” a boat or transport , but would say “hijacked”, “stole” or “pirated” for a demographics they didn’t particularly favour at that time.

I would say the former 2 are used for nationstates and the other 3 are used for "rogue nations" or terrorist groups, though Russia probably gets given the latter 3 verbs for their actions

[–] Senal@programming.dev 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

With "nation" and "rogue" being subject to the perspective(ethical, moral, fiscal etc) of the reporting body.

It's worth looking but I think you'd be surprised by how much subjective leniency Russia gets depending on the politics of the time.

Edit : I wasnt trying to point out a particular bias, just that the guardian is a tabloid rag with delusions of respectability.

They aren't totally inept, nor are they a bastion of unbiased premium journalism