I can agree with that, but Larry was offering the studies up as irrefutable proof that media bias does not exist.
And, sorry Larry, I got a kick out of the fact that one of the studies concluded that not only did a media bias exist, but it was biased on the liberal side, in 18 out of 20 outlets they studied. On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 3:06 PM, Judah McAuley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Oh, well as it turns out, that is pretty easy. You don't have to say > "this is 100% objective". Rather you say "these are my assumptions, > these are my methods, these are my conclusions". And then people can > agree or disagree with you and your conclusions based on their > agreement with those assumptions and methods. > > If I say the word "nazi" appearing in an article other than a > historical context regarding Germany pre/during WWII is going to be > scored as aggressively negative, you can choose to agree or disagree > with my assessment. > > One of the goals of research is to come up with a set of broadly > agreed upon assumptions and methods that can be used to compare > similar types of studies. It may be easier in some fields, say > Physics, to come up with those mutually agreeable assumptions and > methods, but it is not impossible in a particular field just because > it involves humans. Indeed, major breakthroughs in most disciplines > come when a shared assumption or method turns out to not be true and > they have to revise the shared set of assumptions and methods in order > to take new information into account. > > The fundamental thing, though, is not that you are saying conclusively > "this is objective reality" but rather that you have a framework that > is agreed upon as a way to study the phenomena you are interested in. > > Judah > > On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 11:50 AM, Scott Stroz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > That sounds like a good start, but please tell me where humans, who > cannot > > be obejctive, are removed from the process. > > > > You would still need people to offer their opinions on what words > indicate > > bias one way or another. > > You would still need people to offer their opinions on what the 'scoring' > > system would be. > > You would still need people to offer their opinions on what would > constitute > > a news outlet not covering a stort as much as another outlet. > > > > Once again, since 'bias' is a subjective term, there can be no clear > > scientific evidence one way or the other, only research based on > opinions. > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;207172674;29440083;f Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:277102 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
