Liberals will believe anything you tell them as long as it’s published by the Washington Post, CNN, or MSNBC.
Their most recent (and most cringe-worth) lie made its rounds on news stations this week.
A Washington Post story was widely circulated, claiming that Joe Biden receives more negative press coverage than Donald Trump based on an A.I-derived algorithm which devised the analysis.
Allegations that the media gave Joe Biden more negative coverage than President Donald Trump are based on a faulty computer algorithm that render the results “complete crap,” according to a left-of-center pollster.
Nate Silver of FiveThirtyEight analyzed a widely shared Washington Post story, which claims to present scientific evidence that the legacy media were harder on Biden from mid-July through late October than they were on President Trump over the same period in 2020.
Liberal columnist Dana Milbank based his conclusions on an artificial intelligence program, which performed a “sentiment analysis” of “more than 200,000 articles” from 65 websites. He then accused journalists who criticized Joe Biden of being “accessories to the murder of democracy.”
He also wrote that more negative media coverage resulted from the president’s slouching approval rating, which fell dramatically with the compounding problems of the president’s withdrawal from Afghanistan, historic level of illegal immigration, and decades-high inflation.
To this good thread explaining why the "sentiment analysis" cited in the @milbank WaPo article this weekend is complete crap—the analysis was used to make the claim that the press is just negative toward Biden as Trump—I'll also add a couple of comments based on their data. 1/ https://t.co/V8pPJoM13p
— Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) December 6, 2021
Designing good algorithms is hard, but this is an especially bad one.
And as a news consumer, you should be extremely wary of statistical methodologies you don't understand but that confirm your priors. 8/8
— Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) December 6, 2021
Milbank’s story made waves at CNN, which devoted two days of coverage to it. Brianna Keilar interviewed Milbank on Monday’s “New Day,” where he admitted that “Biden’s coverage was more favorable than Trump’s before” August. Yet his report should be considered “a tremendous indictment of our whole industry,” Milbank said. “I think we really need to do some soul searching and think about what it is we’re delivering to people.”
After Keilar pointed out that the algorithm found that Milbank’s employer, The Washington Post, treated Trump worse than Biden, Milbank replied that “the Post and CNN have done better than the average.” Keilar mildly rebuffed the report, saying, “It’s not the job of the reputable news outlets to compensate for, like, the crap that a Breitbart puts out.”
CNN’s Brian Stelter also discussed Milbank’s column.
Fox News senior political analyst Brit Hume called Milbank’s story “absurd,” saying it had been concocted by a “cockamamie” artificial intelligence program.”
“They’re nowhere near as tough as they were on Donald Trump, who was hated with a passion from the beginning of the election campaign in 2016 right through the end of his presidency and and through to today,” Hume said.
In reality, Trump received a historic level of media hostility for all four years of his administration. The “Big Three” networks’ coverage of Trump skewed more than 90% negative during the first impeachment “push”, according to an analysis conducted by the Media Research Center.
Not to mention left-wing news execs concocting behind-the-scenes schemes to publish bogus stories and frame Trump as a literal Nazi.
Author: Elizabeth Tierney
These content links are provided by Content.ad. Both Content.ad and the web site upon which the links are displayed may receive compensation when readers click on these links. Some of the content you are redirected to may be sponsored content. View our privacy policy here.
To learn how you can use Content.ad to drive visitors to your content or add this service to your site, please contact us at [email protected].
Family-Friendly Content
Website owners select the type of content that appears in our units. However, if you would like to ensure that Content.ad always displays family-friendly content on this device, regardless of what site you are on, check the option below. Learn More
These content links are provided by Content.ad. Both Content.ad and the web site upon which the links are displayed may receive compensation when readers click on these links. Some of the content you are redirected to may be sponsored content. View our privacy policy here.
To learn how you can use Content.ad to drive visitors to your content or add this service to your site, please contact us at [email protected].
Family-Friendly Content
Website owners select the type of content that appears in our units. However, if you would like to ensure that Content.ad always displays family-friendly content on this device, regardless of what site you are on, check the option below. Learn More
