Facebook Users Interacted Most With Articles From Fox News, CNN and Breitbart In Month Leading Up To Nov 10 212
Quartz's charts and visualization service The Atlas, has released an insightful chart that shows the "total reader interactions with articles on Facebook" between October 11, 2016 and November 10, 2016. What's surprising is that Breitbart beat a list of establishment media outlets in total Facebook interactions. By far the source with the most interacted articles was Fox News, as it had more than 44 million people interact with its articles. CNN and Breitbart were neck-and-neck with more than 18 million interactions.
I got most of my news from the Onion (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
And it was about as fair and accurate.
Re:I got most of my news from the Onion (Score:5, Insightful)
I can not believe news organizations are actually endorsing politicians! Its effectively saying: We are for Candidate X, so anything we are going to report to you on Candidate X is going to be portrayed in a positive light. Anything their opponents do or way will be portrayed negatively. We are not fair, or balanced, we are encouraging you to pick our choice, who is Candidate X. Fucking rubbish. I don't need your opinions, thats not why you travel with the president. I need the facts, and just that.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I got most of my news from the Onion (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't care that major media outlets are biased. What I find troubling is that media outlets continue to claim to be unbiased when they they are obviously are not (both left and right).
Re: (Score:2)
And of course, when I say "they they are obviously are not", I'm simply referring to the prevailing two political parties in proper newspeak grammar.
Re:I got most of my news from the Onion (Score:4, Insightful)
But that's no excuse not to give it the old college try. I expect people to have viewpoints different than my own, but I don't like to be deliberately manipulated.
Re:I got most of my news from the Onion (Score:5, Insightful)
It is almost impossible to report news without some sort of bias, implicit or explicit.
No it's not. The news media has simply stopped trying. AT ALL.
Re: (Score:3)
Psh. The truth is in the Venn diagram where they intersect. Everything else requires further research. If a right wing website claims because of A, B will happen and is terrible and C is already happening, and a left wing website claims because of A, B will happen and is great, and D will happen, your conclusions are "A happened" and "pundits agree that B will happen". If you care about C and D, whether the pundits are mislead about B, or the merits of B, you need to keep reading.
Re:I got most of my news from the Onion (Score:4, Funny)
The way I get my news is by reading both liberal- and conservative-leaning news outlets.
So now instead of being misinformed, you'll be twice as misinformed!
Re: (Score:3)
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.c... [yourlogicalfallacyis.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Try reading Reuters. They only do simple, factual reports that other news outlets then pick up and add editorial to.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: I got most of my news from the Onion (Score:3, Funny)
You've got to be kidding me. Among so many sources the Wiki leaks of the DNC emails showed how corrupt the MSM is. I saw the leftist propaganda the year Clinton first ran for President back when I did not know or care anything about politics. I was just shocked at the evening news propaganda for Clinton and against Bush. He'll, I assumed Clinton would win because he had the "look", but I was shocked and disgusted that the first time on my life when I paid attention to politics I was watching propaganda
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The saying goes:
The news isn't the news. The news is how you should feel about the news. And the MSM lost it's 5th column power (rooting out corruption) a long time ago...and this election it lost it's persuasive power.
Re: (Score:3)
Well there are two parties in the US that dominate. The media is pretty much aligned with one or the other. Most are aligned (D) and Fox is more or less aligned with (R).
If the Media/News were reporting actual "news" (like WikiLeaks dribble) Hillary would have lost by a lot more.
Re: (Score:2)
It's more complicated than that. Most journalists are under D, but most media owners are under R. It gets complicated from there.
Re: (Score:2)
Why? They've been doing it for a couple of hundred years.
Re: (Score:2)
Facts aren't cut and dried. They have context. They have spin. If the budget raises $1b, that can be a 1% increase, a $1b increase, a deficit increase of $1b, an increase per taxpayer of $3.00, or any other number of framings. Choosing what context is highlighted involves biasing decisions.
For instance, is putting live fac
Re: (Score:2)
On the totally other side, suppose only one candidate, Candidate X, is qualified for the office. Is saying so not a fact?
Facts are things that happen. If a candidate meets the legal qualifications for POTUS, it is a fact that they have met those qualifications. If some random shit has an opinion they pulled out of their anus, that is not a fact. So, it depends on which definition of "qualification" you are using.
Re: (Score:2)
Here I mean "qualified" as in "capable of doing the job". Suppose someone has an IQ of 60. Does that not suggest that the person is unqualified. You think the news should have to present the dry number to people and shut up? Can they tell you that's classified as mentally retarded in your world? Can they tell you a person with an IQ of 60 will be unable to handle the job effectively? What about the expert who explains that the candidate grew up in a home speaking Spanish, and therefore the majority
Re: (Score:2)
As an aging American type, I remember the days of the Walter Cronkite and Paul Harvey types.
Don't bother with any news outlets anymore. They're all corporate produced shit. Most of what's broadcast is filtered and/or totally slanted politically in some way. Fox News being the most dangerous offender IMV as their spew is purely slanted for right wing minded audiences, as you point out. 50% of FNC content, and I'm being generous, is related to current events. The 'Balance' is all "conservative" opinion spew
Re:I got most of my news from the Onion (Score:5, Insightful)
Surely we don't consider America totally evil. They gave us the west coast and a subdued Japanese empire, allowing for the rest of the oriental countries to flourish. Back then though, I'm sure many modern SJWs would have campaigned against those efforts.
Let me be clear. I'm not condoning the bombings of Hiroshima or Nagasaki. I am not condoning genocide either.
We see trump and his alt-right compatriots,racist and incendiary remarks towards illegal immigrants, and muslims, and are quick to paint him with Hitlers colors, but that is not an accurate depiction of the man. He did not make disparaging remarks about all Mexicans, or all Mexican Americans for that matter. He made disparaging remarks about "rapists, and murderers", or "bad hombres". He wants to stop the bad ones from importing massive amounts of narcotics, smuggling in convicts from Mexico and most of Central and South America. I don't necessarily agree with that policy, but I see where he is coming from. Lets be honest with ourselves on illegal immigration. It is a crime. There is a sovereign state that demands an entry process for immigration. Millions of honest and hard working foreigners work effortlessly to qualify and seek to relocate their lives in hope of a better future with more freedoms than they presently have. Those who are here illegally are effectively cutting in line to get here, and undermining the country they are trying to become a part of from the get go. That is not fair. It is not fair to those who have followed procedures, it is not fair to those who took the time and followed the law.
If I break into your house, and squat in it, instead of working hard to afford to purchase it, I would fully expect that I will be evicted, if no charges are brought on me for breaking and entering. Even if I have lived in it for a long time, and have no where else to go, I am still breaking the law and deserve to be kicked out. Trump isn't even going that far either. He has stated that he wants to deport the criminal elements either, those who have committed terrible crimes. I don't have a problem with that. Why do you? There is a reason we have an immigration process and a department we spend a lot of money to enforce it. It's to vet who we give visa's to, and who we allow to naturalize. If these Mexicans were Arabs, and it was Iraq, or Iran, or Sudan on our Southern Border, would deporting them still be such a huge issue?
Back to trump: I believe he has a lot of bad positions, and he surrounds himself with some very questionable people in my book. But we elected him, and we have to see what he renders. We don't have a choice in that matter. I don't believe for a moment that he or anyone he is bringing into the White House are out to harm America. I believe they are patriots and their intentions are good.
I don't believe he is evil, but because the news outlets want to decide for me, I can not rely on their reporting to receive fair facts. This is worse due to the consequence of not knowing what really happens in politics. The best defense against an evil government is a well informed public with free access to information, and the freedom of the press is supposed to gaurantee us that. But what happens when the "free press" aligns itself with a falsehood? I can no longer be informed, and can not decide for myself what is evil. Thats the real problem here.
Re: (Score:2)
Is America evil?
the atom bombs I'll say are debateable.
But drone striking funerals, wedding, and birthday parties I'll say is pretty evil.
As is the then followup drone striking what we would call "first responders" trying to help the injured after the first attack.
As for Trump being evil: Hitler wasn't "Hitler" when he first came on the scene either.
He too was seen as a loon, a long shot, not taken seriously, said hate rhetoric, but given a pass because he wanted to "make Germany great again".
No, it develop
Re: (Score:2)
We see trump and his alt-right compatriots,racist and incendiary remarks towards illegal immigrants, and muslims
You were doing good, albeit long-winded, until you went and threw your credibility in the shitter with that one. Next!
Captcha: wilted
What do you mean? That's not even a complete thought. How did I throw my credibility away with half of one thought? Are you suggesting he has no alt-right compatriots? He didn't make incendiary remarks towards illegal immigrants or muslims?
Re: I got most of my news from the Onion (Score:2)
Re: I got most of my news from the Onion (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What happened to the story about Facebook censoring rightwing news? Where such a fuss was made that the Cons got a face to face with Zuck himself?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/tec... [telegraph.co.uk]
More rightwingnut noisemaking bullshit. To paraphrase Trump, they whine & whine & whine until they get their way
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah. They're busily fixing that "problem" as we speak.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh come off of it, such thinking is in no way tied to the right-wing, it's what people are talking about when they say Human Nature.
In other words, you're projecting as well.
Re: (Score:2)
In the last few months, The Daily Mash and The Rochdale Herald have had depressingly accurate news. The Guardian actually ran an article about a month ago that had exactly the same headline as The Daily Mash a year earlier (Unelectable Man Wins Election).
I'm using a news app that pulls in things from a load of sources and it's often difficult to tell the real news from the parody these days.
Wonder what percentage consulted real news outlets (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: Wonder what percentage consulted real news out (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
[..] Trump had one major advantage in this election. He's not Hilliary Clinton. That, and only that, got him elected. [...]
I'd note that from some of the leaks, apparently they'd wanted him as an opponent on the off chance that people would decide that Trump was worse than her--which is its own major problem, since if you're having to worry about that...maybe you've anointed the wrong heir.
I think you're slightly off here on how free they were to pick who to run, too, but that's because I actually have found rather convincing that the popularity of both Trump and Saunder represented a popular rejection (on both the Left and Rig
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
More Americans get their news from the Daily Show (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Fox News is also a comedy show. Most viewers just don't realize that.
Why is it The Right sucks at comedy and The Left sucks at AM radio?
No alternatives (Score:5, Insightful)
Here's why:
http://www.pewresearch.org/pj_... [pewresearch.org]
The only mainstream media to the right is Fox News. Breitbart is even further right, and that's one of the only other alternatives. However if you look to the left, there are a dozen news organizations (including PBS, which just seems wrong somehow, being government funded).
So what this means is that FB users that identify with the liberal news organizations have their "interactions" divided across those dozen news organizations on the left (CNN, ABC, NBC, MSNBC, CBS, PBS, Washington Post, on and on). Whereas those with conservative views only had a couple of options to choose from. Thus those couple options on the right got more interactions because they were not diluted across so many news choices.
Re:No alternatives (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Or maybe the world's view of "center" is fucked up.Because if your idea of "center" is Liberal Socialist ... what is right? Barely socialist?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
What are centrist views then? What's an example?
ACA is based on a paper from a right-wing think thank, so why is it "left"? Single payer would be "left" I agree, but ACA looks centrist, or even slightly right to me.
Gun control? Most of the population agree to the limits and background checks proposed by Hillary. Wouldn't that make them "centrist"?
And why is climate change "left"? The vast majority of the world doesn't believe it's a hoax. The right are very lonely on the hoax position.
Re: (Score:2)
Rural Vs. Urban [Re:No alternatives] (Score:2)
To communicate ideas we need something that is understood by both the speaker and the listener. There are not any concise decent alternatives yet.
But there is a strong pattern in the US of "rural" culture versus "urban" culture, and this is often what right versus left is about. Maybe "centrist" would then be between these, such as suburbia.
In general, these are differences in assumptions or behaviors between them.
Urban (left):
- Multiculturalism is embrac
Re: (Score:2)
And part of that is practicality. Relying on the police works better in the city, while having guns for self-defense makes more sense in the countryside. Cities are much more mixed places, so people have to get along with more different people. Churches and donations work far better for the poor when communities are small and homogenous.
Re: (Score:2)
But there is a strong pattern in the US of "rural" culture versus "urban" culture
Then say urban/rural. That is both more descriptive and doesn't derive from archaic French politics.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't measure via "left vs right" which is purely subjective and relativistic.
I have said that I am so far to the right, that I am coming up on your left.
Personally, I measure things in the form of Liberty. If you are arguing against me, you're arguing against Liberty. Which is fine, if tyranny is what you're really fighting for. Here is my view in a nutshell.
All humans have innate value, and their rights stem from that innate (Endowed by their Creator) value. These rights should apply to everyone equally
Re: (Score:2)
I actually agree with a lot of this.
Equality of outcome is a really bad idea. Equality of opportunity is easier to approach and much more useful. I'd like to see everyone have a good chance to succeed. What they do with that chance is up to them. In order to approach equality of opportunity, we have to supply people with things. A child who grows up with malnutrition, bad education, and treatable medical conditions which aren't treated, has very little opportunity, and is being denied basic human ri
Re: (Score:2)
It's not really a socialist/libertarian divide any more, it's more a bigot/tolerant divide.
Re: (Score:2)
Calling people bigots is probably the weakest form of debate. It basically says "I can't argue on the merits, so I am going to call you names"
I am sure that works in your circles, but in mine, there are plenty of voices that do not conform to your viewpoint. It is funny how a black man is called a Nazi and Clansman by people like you. Which really shows who is the bigot.
Re: (Score:2)
You will note that when I do describe someone as a bigot, I justify it with further comment. Using a single word as evidence of a weak debate while ignoring everything else said is probably the weakest form of debate.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is that if you say continually pointing out racism is bad for you, then all the other side has to do is continually be racist and it appears legitimate because no-one calls them on it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'd say it's both. They tend to coincide, with tolerant people tending socialist and bigots tending libertarian, but, for example, a classic libertarian is tolerant libertarian.
Re: (Score:2)
"Socialist" and "Conservative" are not necessarily opposites (and both have a lot of different meanings).. I can think of two right-wing socialist movements, the US "Nationalism" kicked off by Bellamy's "Looking Backward", and the "Showa Restoration" in Japan between world wars (the Meiji Restoration was when power was returned to the emperor, and the Showa Restoration would be when all property was returned to the emperor). IIRC, after the fall of the Soviet Union it was the conservatives who wanted to
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe America's idea of center should be represented more in American media?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Um... wtf are you talking about (Score:2)
Oh, you meant social issues, right? Gays marrying and such? That's nice and all. But it doesn't pay the bills. The media is left on social issues and hard right on economic issues. When you take even a cursory glance at who owns them the reasons become obvious. You can't run anything bigger than Mother
Re: (Score:2)
No, the MSM is, other than Fox News (which, having the lion's share of ratings is by definition VERY mainstream) fairly objective in their reporting.
Claims otherwise are examples of projection from Fox fans. No MSNBC is not included in the MSM; they are small potatoes compared to the big 6: ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox, PBS/NPR, and CNN (I'd include HLN, but ever since they were sold off, does anyone even watch them anymore???)
and PBS/NPR have probably the best quality reporting and most carefully protected objectivi
Re: (Score:2)
Here's why: http://www.pewresearch.org/pj_... [pewresearch.org]
This chart doesn't show bias by the news outlets, it shows bias of the audience. Saying the news outlet is biased biased on its audience's bias is a fallacy. [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
There's more on that tree than those cherries you picked.
Re: No alternatives (Score:2)
Right: Barack Obama was born in Kenya Left: Barack Obama was born in Hawaii
The whole Birther thing was started by Hillary Clinton's 2008 campaign.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There really are very few conservatives in Washington. Republicans are no longer conservative as conservatives believe in less government. Bush Jr. was a radical who massively grew the Federal government. The UnPatriotic act that he signed is an obscene violation of everything a true conservative who would cherish individual freedom would never touch. The fact that so many Republicans approved of it repudiates any belief in conservative values. Modern Republicans are for more government control over ci
Re: (Score:2)
Breitbart (Score:3, Insightful)
Breitbart values it's credibility and doesn't indulge the the crazy "fake" news. They aren't perfect, but they're also no worse than the rest. If Breitbart is what GoogleFacebookTwitterCNBCetal are calling "fake" news then this whole "fake" news meme is exactly the kind of bullshit I suspect it is.
Re: (Score:2)
Breitbart actively fakes news. Not just reporting things without properly checking them out first, they go out of their way to manufacture fake stores. For example, the Sherrod and ACORN videos, both of which were carefully edited to give a misleading version of events. In both cases Breitbart has to pay out large sums of money.
Re: (Score:2)
This [biased news source] fact checked your [biased news source] and said your [biased news source] is biased. Please. Just because a news source speaks with British accents, doesn't make them credible. Unless you are easily swayed by that kind of thing, which unfortunately many are.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
In fact it almost seems (like in your case) that there is some sort of neocon badge of honor in being willfully ignorant of the facts.
Actually, there's quite a few people out there who are willfully ignorant of the facts, and proud of it. In fact, I would say that most Trump supporters are indeed willfully ignorant.
How else could you vote a person into the most powerful office on the planet who blatantly lies far more often than not, has been married 3 times and flaunts every other norm while running for office and is also willfully ignorant themselves?
Re: (Score:2)
Is that why ACORN lost it's funding and no longer exists?
And Slashdot posts the most stories about Facebook (Score:4, Insightful)
Is Slashdot getting paid to keep Facebook on the front page, it sure seems that way....
Re:And Slashdot posts the most stories about Faceb (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Hey, whipslash, how about fixing the annoying IE bug?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yep - it's there. https://slashdot.org///slashdo... [slashdot.org]
Re: (Score:2)
I'm with whiplash on this one.
The right wing people have been whining here horrendously how facebook has this massive liberal bias. This actually sheds light on whether that is true or not. It appears it is not true.
I get my news from real sources (Score:2)
Real sources like discarded fish wrappings, poems written on leaves, the patterns on clouds in the sky
Hey, it's probably more accurate.
Never trust the MSM. In just one day, Washington Post wrote 18 articles attacking Bernie Sanders, from 12 writers.
In just one day.
They don't want you to know what's going on, just like they don't want you to see the seven fully operational NSA data collection complexes inside the USA (not the one you think you know about).
Just like they don't want you to know that all US gov
If your in a walled garden (Score:2)
People soon learn not to post links to material they really enjoy and use other IM, email or enjoy much or fun and better stand alone portals.
Social media can offer a few safe listed media sites but its users will just play along.
If every comment and link is been watched by teams of SJW, best just to use the sites features.
What a social media site then offers as group think is then exposed by the rea
Now one trusts the mainstream media anymore (Score:2, Informative)
The major media outlets went all into the tank for Hillary [battleswarmblog.com]. The New York Times abandoned even a pretense of objectivity [nypost.com] to editorialize against Trump on their front page. Wikileaks proved that CNN [zerohedge.com] and the Washington Post [theconserv...ehouse.com] (among others) actively colluded with the Clinton campaign against Trump.
And you know who this hurt most of all? Democrats. Because the MSM was so in the tank for Hillary, the Clinton campaign couldn't get the information it needed to make tactical choices on what money and effort to spen
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
[The New York Times] demonized Trump from start to finish
Trump demonized Trump from the very beginning -- it's not 'demonizing' to report on his public statements.
And the MSM never stopped harping on Hillary and her stupid email story either. It's a manufactured scandal that could have died, but the main stream media never allowed it to, no matter how much you claim they were "in the tank" for Hillary.
Re: (Score:2)
Ok, which of the new articles (not editorials) in the NY Times coverage of the electer were in the tank for Hillary?
Oh, what's that? You can't actually provide specifics or details or anything aside from the hot air spewing out of your mouth.
Well, I guess that makes you just a shill for our new Racist Overlord, Donald Trump.
Re: (Score:2)
If the major media outlets were in the tank for Clinton then they wouldn't have spent so much time on lead stories about her emails, rehashing the scandal over and over and over again constantly. They wouldn't have spent hours talking about her feinting spell, they wouldn't have spent time on the Clinton Foundation...and yet they did.
This Explains our Racist Overlord (Score:2)
Americans consume a healthy diet of propaganda and lies. No wonder, our racist overlord won the election. It would be interesting to go back in time to 1861, and compare the amount of racist propaganda consumed by the American South versus the average Trump voter.
The Left.... (Score:2)
...still looking for someone, anyone to blame for their colossal defeat at the polls.
When the simple answer is that people were sick of patronizing liberalism, enough to roll the dice on goofy blowhard like Trump.
Re: (Score:2)
Calling the DNC "the left", that's fucking rich!
Re: (Score:2)
At least you feel the same way about the voters that Hilary does.
No measurement of the tone (Score:2)
Were more people interacting with these news sites in a positive way or a negative one? For example, say Breitbart posts a story saying something positive about Trump. Where there more Likes or "dislikes" (angry, sad, haha) on Facebook? That information could tell you a lot about the mood of the Facebook voter.
unfortunate. (Score:2)
Once, news agencies at least pretended to be interested in the facts. However, now profit and ratings are more important then responsible journalism. Now the news companies must compete with twitter and blogs. Of course there used to be a lot more chance of monetary loss for inaccurately reporting facts, but most of that was gutted in court because the big networks tried to use it to shut down bloggers. Maybe it is time to bring some of it back.
Feeling old that I remember the days when networks were expe
Re: (Score:2)
Look, there is a likely reason for her lack of anything on the Campaign Trail, as it might have killed her, with her health issues.
And everyone saying she was "healthy" is pretty much taking her word for it (and ignoring every piece of evidence to the contrary).
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
As opposed to getting their news from .. comedy channel like the whiny children rioting in the streets today?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sometimes you've gotta call a spade a spade.