politics

Bot: Hmm this article reflects reality, thus it is biased to the left.

Using charged language like that constitutes disinformation and is reprehensible. Imagine if viewers started disregarding a source on account of your bot declaring it biased.

Shameful.

Is it your position that criticism of Israel should be censored? Is being pro-Palestinian, anti-Israel, or anti-genocide antisemitic?

This is the position of Media Bias/Fact Check. By endorsing their platform, you are also endorsing their radically biased re-definition of antisemitism that is being used to slander holocaust survivors and progressive Jewish voices along with truth speakers of all races and creeds.

Groups like MBFC use their position as gatekeepers of the political spectrum to disguise radical ideas as centrist positions, and it's ironic that you're using such a biased propaganda platform to tell your readers what is credible.

Bias is not the same thing as propaganda, propaganda is not the same thing as misinformation. Articles should be evaluated on how factual they are, and there are plenty of platforms that are doing the hard work of verifying information without putting their political ideology above their credibility. This bot is a mistake.

Your bot sucks and you should feel bad. Where's the source?

It was so annoying I blocked it.
First it takes way to much space, it should be a 1 liner for stating the bias, and then be able to folds out to show the rest.
Second the data is not very useful, for instance it doesn't say if a source i left or right leaning, although I suppose that trustworthy means left, as we all know facts have a liberal bias. It also doesn't show the owner of the media, which has become one of the most significant factors to judge media from.
Also I don't trust the bot to give accurate info, as the source it uses may itself be politicized.

Why are you using a bot that rates media unreliable because they are anti-Zionist using literal pro-israel lobby groups as their source?

Overall, we rate Mondoweiss as Left Biased and Questionable due to the blending of opinion with news, the promotion of pro-Palestinian and anti-zionist propaganda, occasional reliance on poor sources, and hate group designation by third-party pro-Israel advocates.

Thanks. On voyager it’s a little clumsy. The header, body, and footer takes up a lot of space. Trying to close/collapse the comment just expands the comment more.

There’s no reason this needs to be large or in your face. It should be small, like a reference. I’d try to reduce word count, lines, and just overall how much space it uses.

This is fantastic news! I've been using Ground News for a while now, and it's fantastic for spotting propaganda/bias/etc. Very well done!

Thanks for this Rooki!

This is fantastic!!! Thank you so much for this.

This bot uses MBFC to check context comments and adds a simple reply to show bias.

What does the bot check? It checks the comments to determine bias? What "context?"

How does the autoreply show bias?

E: Okay I went and looked at one of the autoreplies and I get what it does and I'm excited about it. That sentence could use a little work. Rest of your post is great. You could have done better! I await your revisions.

Media Bias Fact Check is a fact-checking website that rates the bias and credibility of news sources. They are known for their comprehensive and detailed reports.

Thanks to Media Bias Fact Check for their access to the API.
Please consider supporting them by donating.

Beep boop. This action was performed automatically. If you dont like me then please block me.💔
If you have any questions or comments about me, you can make a post to LW Support lemmy community.

For those reporting the bot:

We know! We worked with the Admins to enable it. :)

Excellent idea.

I'd also consider adding Ad Fontes bias checks for an additional perspective done with a different methodology, as well as just more coverage, as MB/FC often doesn't have an entry for more niche sources. Ad Fontes scales itself more to the American political center, as well, so may be perceived as less inherently biased by certain consumers who may be more inclined to outright reject a single fact checking source for political reasons.