The news is biased. I understand that. It's inevitable, people are inherently biased, we all see the world through our own perspective. But that doesn't mean the news isn't useful. Especially when it tries to be objective and tries to provide both sides of the story, because then there's probably at least some useful information you can use after you filter out what you regard as "unfair" bias (there's always some degree of what people judge as "fair" or "honest" bias which is pretty much where the reader's biases and the reporter's biases overlap (I'm using bias in a very broad sense, you can be perfectly correct in your opinions but that'll still affect how you report the issue, maybe it'll lead you to tilt your article towards the correct analysis of the issue, that's fine but it's still bias), and if you can get some information you can think about the issues yourself.
Still it's also useful to get other points of view on things and also to read people who share your point of view but take a deeper analysis than you do or perhaps than you are capable of doing so you can expand your opinions. Still that doesn't stop me from getting riled up by stuff I read in the news. Unfortunately, I can rarely remember who exactly I read the information from which leads me to aggregate the opinions into a general positions, more unfortunately, sometimes I aggregate a lot of more sophisticated opinions opposed to me with some rather ridiculous opinions opposed to me (usually cultivated from Wikipedia, wander through the criticism section of various intellectual sections), but occasionally I remember legitimate opposition opinions, or if not legitimate, opposition opinions that were actually popular.
Take for example the idea that because we have no right to dictate to people in the Middle East how to run their governments we should support the current governments there. That makes no sense, because if we can't dictate how they should run their governments than what right do we have to tell them they should have their current governments which are for most part really quite awful. (But I have to say overall I would agree that we cannot invade countries to for our ideals, not because an ideal like democracy for everyone is wrong, but because it would lead to international chaos. (However, if we do invade a country for self-defense, or for defense of an ally, or perhaps to prevent genocide, we have no right to set up any government but democracy.)
Least that's what I think, and that's all that really matters. So take it to your head, take it to your heart and remember Rand rocks. Goodnight Folks!
6 months ago