I know MediaBiasFactCheck is not a be-all-end-all to truth/bias in media, but I find it to be a useful resource.

It makes sense to downvote it in posts that have great discussion – let the content rise up so people can have discussions with humans, sure.

But sometimes I see it getting downvoted when it’s the only comment there. Which does nothing, unless a reader has rules that automatically hide downvoted comments (but a reader would be able to expand the comment anyways…so really no difference).

What’s the point of downvoting? My only guess is that there’s people who are salty about something it said about some source they like. Yet I don’t see anyone providing an alternative to MediaBiasFactCheck…

  • Raffster@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    48
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    So that bot claims fact already in it’s name. I learned to check facts myself. I will never trust automation to do that for me. Also bias and fact are two things that don’t go well together. One is measurable the other not at all. And the downvote is for anything I want to see less of.

    • otp@sh.itjust.worksOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      Hmm. I’m not sure if you understand what it is.

      MediaBiasFactCheck is a website run by human beings who fact check and bias check various media sources. They assign separate ratings for each source’s bias and credibility.

      The bot just checks the website and shares the results for the source of a given post.

      I’m not defending it, just explaining what it is since your argument seems to be against something that it’s not.