Journalism Quality and Partisanship 2017 Guide

38 Comments - Write a Comment

      1. I’m surprised you have RT, which is the Russia state-owned propaganda arm, anywhere off the floor in quality. Sure, not everything they say is wrong, but they have a Russian government-sponsored agenda, so on select issues, they will say whatever they have to, regardless of Truth.

        You also have TV rated higher in quality than newspapers in general, despite the vast difference in staff sizes. It’s as though you have quality as a measure of production values, visual impact, polish, and professional appearance.

        Quality should be about adherence to facts, trustworthiness, emphasis on checking sources, reliability, thoroughness and other attributes that make a news source worth listening too. I think the vertical axis should be rethought.

        Reply
    1. I think this shows a shift to the right given the Disney/ABC history of union busting. It has also handled Conway andTrump with kid gloves. That is, if you watch George Stephanopoulos. Who created this list? This seems a bit biased itself in my opinion with the outlier, Breitbart, tucked in a bit closer to the left than appropriate.

      Reply
  1. Hey! Someone in my Facebook group shared this site with
    us so I came to look it over. I’m definitely loving the information. I’m
    book-marking and will be tweeting this to my followers!
    Excellent blog and excellent design.

    Reply
  2. Quite accurate in your placements. I’d suggest moving Drudge a bit more out of the garbage column, but I notice you have it in the mixed quality as well. Nice job!

    Reply
  3. I don’t get it. According to Mediabiasfactcheck.com, Buzzfeed is Center-left and its reporting is Medium, and Vox’s is High; you put them both at Hyper-partisans and poor quality… What other source did you use for that?

    Reply
  4. Please include The New Yorker, Pro Publica, Columbia Journalism Review, Roll Call, Esquire, Harper’s and Longform, etc. ? Emphasis should be added to those org’s doing Original Reporting!

    Reply
  5. I’ve checked mediabiasfactcheck.com as well. Where can you find the methodology for their information? I’m assuming you’ve checked since you’re using it here. Thank you!

    Reply
  6. Publications like National Review were started specifically stating they were for Conservatives and they were very critical of Trump so I’d move them more to Leaning Right than hyper right

    Reply
  7. Nice chart. I think this kind of thing could be very helpful. I agree with your right/left distribution but the vertical axis seems off. There’s no way that The Daily Beast, The Daily Dot, and Mother Jones are more accurate than The NY Times and The a Washington Post, IMO.

    Reply
  8. I dont think yiu can rquatr Salon as partially garbage on the left when the other side is Beritbart on the partially garbage right. Salon has a long hustory of following standard journalistic techniques and in depth stories. Breitbart doesn’t bother with that, they have a long history of just make things up. Perhaps you should move Salon in and up a bit.

    Reply
  9. Mediabiasfactcheck is not a reliable data source, the methodology on their blog-style site would not stand a few seconds of scrutiny. This graph is starting to make the rounds and is grossly misleading, slanted by data from a right wing activist. You seem to have a good thing going with your youtube vids, that intro is dope, and your photoshop skills are evident. If you put out this propoganda innocently and by accident, I urge you to take it down and find a more solid data source. If you put this out knowingly and maliciously, then you should expect journalists to start digging around for your motives.

    Reply
  10. Will, great graphic. It’s generating a lot of discussion in my circles. You should’ve made your watermark a bit more pronounced! Or was that intentional? Anyway, wondering if you could describe the… sausage making if you will, from the stats obtained from Mediabiasfactcheck to get the graphic? I see some positions that are debatable but for the most part I find it accurate. Thanks!

    Reply
  11. Noticing Breitbart is not included in this infographic. Perhaps they don’t meet the journalism quality criteria but curious about the omission. I look forward to future updates as it has never been more important to have vetted news sources rise to the top.

    Reply
  12. Some suggestions: your figure seems to add more detail than the imgur one going around but still incomplete and a little off. It would be great if you could merge the two figures. Yours leaves off some left and right trash that the other doesn’t like Occupy Democrats or InfoWars, for example. And Brookings, BBC, NPR, and PBS News Hour are really more neutral, like the other image showed. And I liked how the other figure also had CNN and USAToday under “better than no news at all” since they are not the best quality. Both images are missing Al-jazeera which is neutral and excellent. Do you know the other figure I mean?

    Reply
  13. Great graphic. Probably should add someplace on it a link to this page to make the original easy to find…and so people can know where it came from and what it’s based on. Finding the truth these days is difficult and time-consuming especially given the current Republican administration’s penchant for lying (aka relying on “alternative facts”). I know politicians of all persuasions are often less than trustworthy, but maintaining multiple lies in the face of overwhelming data to the contrary has never occurred on the scale that it is now with the present Republican administration.

    Reply
  14. Hi Will. This has been going nuts in my little circle of Facebook. Certainly an interesting thought experiment. I’m not sure about Mediabiasfactcheck.com … seems to be a right-leaning source itself. But I’m not sure I get your methodology translating from their ratings to the chart. For example, Vox is rated “Factual Reporting: HIGH” on MBFC while RT News is rated “Factual Reporting: MIXED” … yet on the chart Vox is much lower, indicating lower quality independent of political Bias.

    Reply
  15. Thanks for this. I happen to like the original Otero chart better, partly over the placement of some specific sources but mostly because of this one’s assumption that the center is “where news should be.” In my opinion the best journalism recognizes that scrambling to the middle itself introduces bias, and the goal should allow journalists to reach conclusions with a “lean” as long as they acknowledge their own biases and nevertheless build their work on solid fact.

    Here’s Otero’s.

    http://jerz.setonhill.edu/blog/2016/12/12/vanessa-oteros-media-complexclickbait-liberalconservative-chart/

    Reply

Post Comment