This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Do you see the bias in secular news/science?

  • Topic Archived
You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
  1. Boards
  2. Religion
  3. Do you see the bias in secular news/science?

User Info: Faust_8

Faust_8
4 months ago#21
This has nothing to do with actual science.

The media reporting on scientific findings have always been sensational, misleading, and inaccurate. It doesn't mean the actual science is though.

Just look at all the science things are basically "hmm, found something interesting in space" and then things like Yahoo News is like "ITS TOTALLY ALIENS GUYS!"

Just because they can find one guy who's like "well yeah that is technically a possibility but we're not even really considering that yet."
"A book is proof that humans are capable of working magic." --Carl Sagan

User Info: SSj4Wingzero

SSj4Wingzero
4 months ago#22
Hexagon posted...
I don't really know how to respond to that. So you would rather read about news that you don't really care about? Or wouldn't think it implicates you in any way? You know there's a difference between a focus and bias, where the latter has a negative connotation of being unfair. I highly doubt that most people would agree to favoring news they don't care about over that which they do.


Yeah that doesn't make sense

Media outlets want ratings. To get ratings, they attempt to generate stories where there aren't any. They attempt to generate controversy where there isn't any. Rather than faithfully reporting the facts, they hear of a scientific study or a religious non-event and they exaggerate those facts, or in some cases, outright lie about them, in order to create some sort of controversy and draw in readers. So they're literally biased against the truth and in favor of controversy, wherever that exists.

Faust_8 posted...
This has nothing to do with actual science.

The media reporting on scientific findings have always been sensational, misleading, and inaccurate. It doesn't mean the actual science is though.

Just look at all the science things are basically "hmm, found something interesting in space" and then things like Yahoo News is like "ITS TOTALLY ALIENS GUYS!"

Just because they can find one guy who's like "well yeah that is technically a possibility but we're not even really considering that yet."


You know, it'd be more reassuring if it were just Yahoo News reporting stuff like this, but when even organizations like Reuters are jumping on board the Fake News train, it leaves you with very little hope
Not changing this sig until the Knicks win the NBA Championship! Started...4/23/2011? Or was it 2010?

User Info: Al-Uzza

Al-Uzza
4 months ago#23
SSj4Wingzero posted...

when even organizations like Reuters are jumping on board the Fake News train, it leaves you with very little hope


I am also left with little hope when the president says negative polls are fake news.

User Info: kozlo100

kozlo100
4 months ago#24
Hexagon posted...
So you would rather read about news that you don't really care about? Or wouldn't think it implicates you in any way?


I would rather read about news that is real.

I once heard the issue put in a way that seemed good to me: Reality doesn't care how you feel, it just is. So if a particular headline or story makes you feel particularly angry, smug, justified, or any of those really satisfying emotions, you need to carefully check whether or not the story was designed to do just that.
Time flies like the wind,
and fruit flies like a banana.

User Info: Dathrowed1

Dathrowed1
4 months ago#25
Yeah as already said, the first sentence is flawed because the bible never said the Phoenicians were destroyed completely
sig

User Info: Ashethan

Ashethan
4 months ago#26
Science is biased against religion because science favors reality, and reality is biased against religion.
Growing up, I wish some teacher told me "You probably won't ever need this, but if you don't learn it, you might miss out on something really cool."

User Info: YHWH_Saves

YHWH_Saves
4 months ago#27
Ashethan posted...
Science is biased against religion because science favors reality, and reality is biased against religion.

Then you should be just as willing to rally against false testimony (as that found in the linked article) which places undue doubt upon the backing institution of science.

In other words, if reality is so disparaged from religion, then let the facts stand; down with the abuse of information, or the employment of deception, to build a case.
"Man will not live off of bread alone, but by every word proceeding through the mouth of God." "You are not able to serve God and wealth.".

User Info: CoyoteTheGreat

CoyoteTheGreat
4 months ago#28
SSj4Wingzero posted...
Here's the thing:

Despite whatever you might feel about our current administration or government..."Fake News" most certainly IS a real thing.

A few months ago, Reuters ran an article saying that Pope Francis claimed "It is better to be atheist than a hypocritical Catholic." REUTERS, of all people, ran with that. Except Pope Francis didn't say that - he was quoting what OTHER people might say when they see hypocritical Catholics.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-pope-atheists-idUSKBN1621I3

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2017/02/23/pope-francis-praises-the-torah-and-suggests-its-better-to-be-an-atheist-than-a-bad-catholic/?utm_term=.1d0d8c447f2b

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/pope-francis-better-atheist-hypocritical-catholic-vatican-holy-father-doctrine-roman-church-a7595841.html

https://www.aol.com/article/news/2017/02/23/pope-francis-suggests-better-to-be-atheist-than-hypocritical-catholic/21720539/

And since Reuters' articles basically go everywhere, it was shared by multiple news sites. Even though it's a blatant misquoting of what the Pope actually said. And oh by the way? Has there been a retraction, a clarification, or anything of the sort? Absolutely not, because they don't seem to actually care about that anymore.

This *seems* to be exactly the same nonsense going on again. Media outlets are desperate for ratings and thus they focus on clickbait headlines that hit on hot-button social issues. I'm sure this has always been a thing in some way, shape, or form, but it seems to be getting worse in the age of social media, which helps clickbait nonsense get more traction than it used to. What used to be an all-caps spam headline in your inbox is now becoming actual articles on actual news sites. Formerly prominent news organizations, rather than establishing a standard for journalistic integrity, are instead buying into this nonsense.

Nowadays if something isn't from the AP I don't even bother reading it, to be honest, and even then, I question its value


That isn't really an example of fake news though, it is an example of careless news. They did not misquote him, they misinterpreted him. You are trying to ascribe an insidious motive to something more easily explained by laziness, or even just reporters being rushed to meet deadlines. The 24 hour news cycle is an unforgiving mistress.

Fake news certainly exists. But it exists in the realm of outright propaganda and state-owned media. Most news isn't like that though.
Disobedience is the stamp of the hero. -Ragnar Redbeard
Also, this is Kagata.. http://www.yescalifornia.org/

User Info: SSj4Wingzero

SSj4Wingzero
4 months ago#29
Ashethan posted...
Science is biased against religion because science favors reality, and reality is biased against religion.


Whatever your religious beliefs or lack thereof, making false statements in order to slander religion "in the name of reality" is disturbingly ironic and rather dumb

CoyoteTheGreat posted...
That isn't really an example of fake news though, it is an example of careless news. They did not misquote him, they misinterpreted him. You are trying to ascribe an insidious motive to something more easily explained by laziness, or even just reporters being rushed to meet deadlines. The 24 hour news cycle is an unforgiving mistress.

Fake news certainly exists. But it exists in the realm of outright propaganda and state-owned media. Most news isn't like that though.


That's a pretty lame excuse for a news organization that is supposed to be regarded as the best in the entire world

If a single person can read that statement by the Pope and think that he said people are better off being atheists than hypocritical Catholics, that person should not be a journalist. It took me 30 seconds of scanning the Pope's statement to know that the news agency had completely spun what he was saying out of proportion and turned it into something he wasn't, and I am not a trained journalist. That's a sad excuse for journalism.

And has there been a retraction? Or a correction? Or an admittance that the Pope didn't actually say that? No, of course not.

Reading the Pope's statement as "He said you're better off being an atheist than a hypocritical Catholic" is like walking in on a student reading an Edgar Allan Poe short story and thinking that the student literally wants to bury his archenemy behind a wall. It's nonsense and even a high schooler is smart enough to know otherwise.
Not changing this sig until the Knicks win the NBA Championship! Started...4/23/2011? Or was it 2010?
  1. Boards
  2. Religion
  3. Do you see the bias in secular news/science?

Report Message

Terms of Use Violations:

Etiquette Issues:

Notes (optional; required for "Other"):
Add user to Ignore List after reporting

Topic Sticky

You are not allowed to request a sticky.

  • Topic Archived