Does "Balanced Coverage" Work in the Age of Asymmetrical Polarization?

[Milchshake]

I'm wondering if all the people saying "both sides are equally bad are really paying attention? Or are they just repeating how Big Media characterizes politics?
If anything this piece by Paul Krugman really takes apart how the media's devotion to "balance" seems to undercut basic reporting.

Notice the implicit assumption here – namely, that impartial fact-checking would find an equal number of false claims from each party. But what if – bear with me a minute – Republicans actually make more false claims than Democrats?

Take a not at all arbitrary example: tax policy. The GOP is deeply committed to the proposition that tax cuts pay for themselves, a view that has no support whatsoever from professional economists. Can you find any comparable insistence on a view experts consider false on the Democratic side?

Similarly, the GOP is deeply committed to climate change denial, despite the overwhelming consensus of scientists that anthropogenic climate change is real and dangerous. Again, where’s the Democratic counterpart?

[Jaransan]

Heres the problem right? The media HAS reported all those things in the past, all the lies and the discrepancies - but the average American considers loyalty to their party to be a 'core' truth. A part of their worldview. People who feel like these truths are being attacked, or disproven, are proven to respond with a sort of fight or flight response. They panic and get mad and refuse to think about it. Its very much like looking Cthulu in the face and not being able to mentally handle it so you pretend it didnt happen.

This means that the 'bias' many people experience in the media is DRASTICALLY overstated by most people. If a station tries to put stories like the ones mentioned in the OP up, people lose their damn minds and call for witch hunts. The media, having at least SOME responsibility I suppose, seems to be trying to cater the people who are biased towards their stations without causing outright riots by suggesting that 'this entire party are traitorous liars'. Because that would be kind of unamerican. Interesting culture you guys have, I give you that.

[Mormolyce]

When people confuse the statement:

-Both sides are bad

With:

-Both sides are EQUALLY bad

There is either serious disingenuity or serious stupidity at play.

More formally it's the logical fallacy of argumentum ad temperantiam or the middle point fallacy.

But it's certainly handy as a defence for shitty people, because they can use the fact that their opponent isn't perfect either as an excuse for being a garbage human being.

[Mittens]

The wise man bowed his head solemnly and spoke: "Theres actually zero difference between good & bad things. you imbecile. you fucking moron"


I'm never getting tired of this.

[Cthulhu 2020]

When people confuse the statement:

-Both sides are bad

With:

-Both sides are EQUALLY bad

There is either serious disingenuity or serious stupidity at play.

More formally it's the logical fallacy of argumentum ad temperantiam or the middle point fallacy.

But it's certainly handy as a defence for shitty people, because they can use the fact that their opponent isn't perfect either as an excuse for being a garbage human being.

Yeah, this argument is used pretty commonly these days by the right.

When they're caught doing godawful things or being terrible people, they try to deflect onto some other minor issue on the other side, as if all evils are equal.

Got into a debate with someone on this very forum about this, and they said that yes, no matter what, if Republicans are being bad, but Democrats are also, then it's all equal. I asked them if murder and stealing a candy bar were equally bad.

They answered that it was. Purely for the sake of not admitting they were wrong I'm sure.

[LaserSharkDFB]

Yup. Sorry, Republicans, but this is one point on which your side is objectively and measurably worse than Democrats. There is no left-wing fountain of crazy bullshit that can compare to the following of Breitbart, Infowars, and radio pundits; I'm not saying such sources don't exist, mind, but if they do their audience is much, much smaller.

This is the house you've built for yourself over the last few decades. You should have gotten rid of the crazies and the liars, but chose not to and often voted them into office. Better to just burn the whole place down and start over. I wish you would; then maybe we'd get some better leaders on this side.

[Milchshake]

When people confuse the statement:

-Both sides are bad

With:

-Both sides are EQUALLY bad

There is either serious disingenuity or serious stupidity at play.

More formally it's the logical fallacy of argumentum ad temperantiam or the middle point fallacy.

But it's certainly handy as a defence for shitty people, because they can use the fact that their opponent isn't perfect either as an excuse for being a garbage human being.

Thanks for tying into argumentum ad temperantiam, I'm not as familiar with the technical terms of rhetorical analysis as I wish I was. I just know a bad faith argument when I see one.

Speaking of which, is there a more technical term for concern trolling? Asking for a friend who frequents these forums ...

[Sunseeker]

This is what people mean by "reality leans left". It's not so much that reality aligns with left-wing politics more often than not, it's that left-wing politics is generally more aligned with reality. Conservatives have been deeply out of touch with reality for a long time, so naturally "the facts" appear to be on the left...because the right has a shortage of facts.

[Mormolyce]

Thanks for tying into argumentum ad temperantiam, I'm not as familiar with the technical terms of rhetorical analysis as I wish I was. I just know a bad faith argument when I see one.

Speaking of which, is there a more technical term for concern trolling? Asking for a friend who frequents these forums ...

To be honest I had to look that one up because I frequently forget the technical names of the formal fallacies.

I'm not sure if "concern trolling" is an actual fallacy, though they tend to invoke them.

[Heladys]

There's such a thing as honest coverage, which is what people tend to be thinking of when they say balanced, but reality isn't balanced. There are rights and wrongs. There aren't equivalent value in different points of view. There is no value in presenting "both sides" of an issue when one side is indefensible.

That's not to defend skewed reporting of any orientation, but the straight preference for lies these days is ridiculous.

[Kellhound]

Both sides are bad, and neither side cares about anyone that isn't in their special interest groups, and that will not change until we figure out how to have 3-5 viable political parties.

[Cthulhu 2020]

To be honest I had to look that one up because I frequently forget the technical names of the formal fallacies.

I'm not sure if "concern trolling" is an actual fallacy, though they tend to invoke them.

It's not so much a fallacy is it's just what it says it is.

It's when all of the Trumpkins were calling Bernie supporters lazy poor socialist college kids who couldn't get a job. Then all of a sudden pretended to care about the conduct of the DNC when they got the slightest whiff that there might have been foul play.

The worst part was, the idiot Bernie Bros fully accepted every ounce of sympathy thrown their way by the deplorables.

[PosPosPos]

Speaking of which, is there a more technical term for concern trolling? Asking for a friend who frequents these forums ...

Sealionning(a specific subset of a concern troll that keeps pestering people with questions they don't actually want answers to, just doing it to wear down opponents) or simply showing false concern.

You see this everyday with people like Zenkai or Dacien.

[ati87]

Both sides are bad, and neither side cares about anyone that isn't in their special interest groups, and that will not change until we figure out how to have 3-5 viable political parties.

Oh god this shit again.

Lets look at 8 years of Obama and what was pushed during that time and 1 year of Trump and what he has been pushing for.

Obama pushed for net neutrality Trump and co are trying to gut it
Obama pushed for a healthcare that covered and protected people Trump and Co are trying to gut it
Obama pushed for economic growth based simpel supply and demand economics Trump wants trickle down economics that has been proven not to work.

[PosPosPos]

Oh god this shit again.

Lets look at 8 years of Obama and what was pushed during that time and 1 year of Trump and what he has been pushing for.

Obama pushed for net neutrality Trump and co are trying to gut it
Obama pushed for a healthcare that covered and protected people Trump and Co are trying to gut it
Obama pushed for economic growth based simpel supply and demand economics Trump wants trickle down economics that has been proven not to work.

It's just the usual alt-right false concern, these specimens love pretend they are independents, but it's obvious to anyone with a brain that they just want to shill for fascism without having the balls to face the social backlash.

[jakeic]

The wise man bowed his head solemnly and spoke: "Theres actually zero difference between good & bad things. you imbecile. you fucking moron"


I'm never getting tired of this.

I do not understand this, without any context it's impossible to know if it's meant to be literal or ironic. Either way the quote is bland, any person is capable of providing an example of good things and bad things that are different, while a wise man probably wouldn't refer to another person is such a diminutive manner once let alone twice. It feels like a line written in a twelve year olds Lord of the Rings fanfiction of Gandalf.

[Kellhound]

Oh god this shit again.

Lets look at 8 years of Obama and what was pushed during that time and 1 year of Trump and what he has been pushing for.

Obama pushed for net neutrality Trump and co are trying to gut it
Obama pushed for a healthcare that covered and protected people Trump and Co are trying to gut it
Obama pushed for economic growth based simpel supply and demand economics Trump wants trickle down economics that has been proven not to work.

And I can counter with things like Obama (or at least his DOJ) pushed for using Stingrays without a warrant and going as far as dropping charges to avoid disclosing their use. Again, neither party cares beyond what power they gain from it.

- - - Updated - - -

It's just the usual alt-right false concern, these specimens love pretend they are independents, but it's obvious to anyone with a brain that they just want to shill for fascism without having the balls to face the social backlash.

The far left and the far right are closer to each other than the middle....

[ati87]

And I can counter with things like Obama (or at least his DOJ) pushed for using Stingrays without a warrant and going as far as dropping charges to avoid disclosing their use. Again, neither party cares beyond what power they gain from it.

- - - Updated - - -



The far left and the far right are closer to each other than the middle....

You are comparing something every administration would do (and probably does)....and so 1 vague example vs 3 and things become equal?

The examples I stated is something Republicans actively want to destroy instead of fixing. Outside of braindead morons who claims that the tax plan of the GOP will do anything positive? Not economist, not even CEO's dared to raise there hands when they where asked the question if they would hire more people or increase wages.

[Mittens]

I do not understand this, without any context it's impossible to know if it's meant to be literal or ironic. Either way the quote is bland, any person is capable of providing an example of good things and bad things that are different, while a wise man probably wouldn't refer to another person is such a diminutive manner once let alone twice. It feels like a line written in a twelve year olds Lord of the Rings fanfiction of Gandalf.

It is ironic, it is meant to mock the "le both sides are the same" group.

[Machismo]

Both sides are bad, and neither side cares about anyone that isn't in their special interest groups, and that will not change until we figure out how to have 3-5 viable political parties.

That will not happen so long as the Electoral College exists. It is the main obstacle towards multiple parties. We'd be far better off with a popular vote and runoff if nobody gets 50% +1.

Somehow, I don't see conservatives and rural people giving up their affirmative action so easily.