Reflections From a Murky Pond

Yes, it’s true; fact-checking the statements of politicians and political candidates is important. Yet, a horrid issue has arisen in that the organizations and people entrusted by the masses with such fact-checking, the MSM, is grossly lacking in the integrity to properly do so. Media fact-checking is generally considered to be so biased as to be worthless as a source of checking actual facts.

Media Fact-Checking Today

The only good thing is that the American people have, by and large, figured out the Lamestream Media is biased in all facets of their presentation of events, including fact-checking. Hellfire! They’re open and unapologetic about it these days.

It’s a proven fact that the majority voters know that the media plays favorites when it comes to fact-checking candidates’ statements. It’s also understood that the media today is little more than a propaganda service for the Democrat party. Indeed a recent polls shows that just 29% of all likely US voters have any trust the media’s fact-checking of candidates’ comments. 62% believe instead that media skew the facts to help candidates they support.

This well-thought distrust of the impartiality isn’t evenly distributed though. 88% of of voters who are likely to vote for Donald Trump in the presidential race believe news organizations skew the facts as do a majority of both Gary Johnson’s (Libertarian) and Jill Stein’s (Green) supporters, whereas fully 59% of Clinton’s followers trust the media fact-checking.

In actuality though, this intellectual or deontological “dimorphism” or disparity is expected and well-understood. Clinton’s followers are hearing being told what they want to hear and already believe. Hence, a variety of confirmation bias goes into effect, causing them to trust and believe what the Lamestream media tells them. At the same time, the media’s fact-checkers – the majority of whom are somewhere on the Liberal / Progressive arc – suffer from a form of observer bias which taints their findings in favor of the candidate(s) – normally Democrats – they support.

As evidence of this effect I refer you to the past, when those on the left very much did not trust much of what the media told them, fact-checking or otherwise, that was not against Operation Desert Shield and later Desert Storm. When the media wasn’t reinforcing the Liberals’ and Progressives’ beliefs they distrusted them and what they reported.

And, my Fellow Americans, I believe that this will just get worse, especially if Clinton is allowed to secure the Presidency. The news media is a for-profit operation. It’s beholden to its viewership to secure the ratings it needs to get the highest bids for its commercial spots. As more Americans tune out the Lamestream media the outlets will swing even further into the Left’s pockets in order to keep enough viewers to stay afloat.

Tags: 2016 Elections | America | Confirmation Bias | Democrat Party | Hillary | Media | Media Bias | MSM | Observer Bias | Politics | Republican Party | Trump

This entry was posted on Tuesday, October 4th, 2016 at 7:59 am and is filed under 2016 Election, Politics. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

Google modifies, tweaks, and just plain changes its search algorithm on a regular basis, most often to disrupt the effectiveness of Search Engine Optimization (SEO) efforts. Now, however, a Google research team is trying to change  the algorithm, to measure the “trustworthiness” of a page, rather than its reputation across the web.

The system – which is has not yet gone live – counts the number of “incorrect” facts within a page to determine its ranking in search results instead of its reputation or popularity, as measured by incoming links, across the web.

Google – The Internet’s Gatekeeper

This, of course, begs the questions of whose facts? Whose truths? Who will decide what is innacurate and, hence, to be downlisted and effectively censored by Google?

Google’s answers are that facts that the web unanimously agrees upon are considered to be a reasonable proxy for truth. Web pages that dissent from this consensus by containing contradictory information are to be bumped down the rankings, effectively censoring them by removing them from the bulk of the web’s users.

So, insofar as the internet’s greatest gatekeeper, Google is concerned, consensus reality will be the only reality. And, of course, Google will be the arbiter of that consensus.

I guess, if Google’s plan is allowed to be implemented, nobody will read where you wrote, “And yet it moves.“

Tags: Bias | Censorship | Conformity | Consensus | Consensus Reality | Dissent | Facts | Google | Innovation | Internet | Lies | Myths | Observer Bias | Politics | Science | Social Engineering | Stagnation | Technology | Truth

This entry was posted on Monday, March 9th, 2015 at 8:52 am and is filed under Politics, Society, Technology. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

Bias is natural and inherent in just about anything and everything. It’s natural; as natural of a law as the General Law of Relativity and quite related to it in point of odd fact. In anything approaching science, however, it is inconvenient at best…if one actually wants accurate results. This is because observer bias can color and cloud the results.

It needs to be noted and remembered, however, that those who conduct such research or contract others to conduct it on their behalf are only inconvenienced by such bias if and when they desire truthful, accurate, and objective results. This is far from the norm, especially when the government with its many and diverse perceived vested interests is performing or paying for the research in question.

A Case In Point

The FCC’s recently suspended – not cancelled – hunt for “station bias” and for television news teams not meeting the “Critical Information Needs” of specially protected demographics was based upon methodology and metrics developed for them under contract by Social Solutions International, which is a “minority owned” firm enjoying the pecuniary advantages of their 8(a) status.

In and of itself, SSi’s 8(a) status is just barely the appearance of bias. What is telling is their self-identification and mission statement.

About Us

Social Solutions is a research and evaluation firm dedicated to the creation of positive change for underserved populations. Our work touches those in our community and in countries worldwide. We are a mission-driven organization that believes that superior science can improve the world.

Company Overview

Social Solutions International, Inc. (Social Solutions) is a Hispanic and woman owned 8(a) and Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB). Social Solutions emphasis is on quality research and evaluation, development of evidence-based education materials, and cultural adaptation and translation.

Mission Statement

Social Solutions International, Inc. is a research and evaluation firm dedicated to the creation of social and health solutions to improve the welfare of underserved populations worldwide.

It is ludicrous at best to even entertain the thought that a company describing itself as a “Small Disadvantaged Business” which is “mission-driven” to “improve the welfare of underserved populations” is capable of- much less willing to deliver objective testing methodologies in any context involving what they consider underserved populations.

The only plausible reason why the FCC would have awarded them the contract was that the FCC didn’t want to be inconvenienced by objectivity. No, instead they were seeking agenda-driven junk science because there was a specific result that they wanted from the study.

And that, my fellow Americans, could be a very inconvenient bias for we, the People.

Tags: America | Bias | FCC | Junk Science | Observer Bias | Politics | Science | Social Solutions | SSi

This entry was posted on Thursday, February 27th, 2014 at 5:30 pm and is filed under Politics. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.