MIT Study Attacks Fox News as ‘Not to Be Trusted’

NewsBusters | 1/31/2019 | Staff
Traight (Posted by) Level 3
Click For Photo:

The schools and studies that are shaping technology’s approach to fake news and censorship are biased in favor of the left.

A study released by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology opened with the premise that readers should be able to determine what fake news is and isn’t. Readers were given the chance to rate how much they trusted certain sources, and their ratings were matched with those of professional fact checkers. Heritage’s The Daily Signal, Breitbart, The Daily Caller, The Daily Wire, Independent Journal Review, and Red State were all labeled “hyperpartisan and low quality.”

Definition - News - Quality - Journalism - Study

The definition of hyperpartisan news and low quality journalism in the study was just slightly above fake news. “Lay people across the political spectrum agreed with professional fact-checkers that hyperpartisan and fake news sites should not be trusted.”

On a scale of zero to one, with one being the highest score, sites like The New York Times and The Washington Post were at the top of the 60 sites chosen for analysis. Any score under .5 was considered a marker for “low quality journalism.” The fact-checkers even gave low scores to some of the mainstream sites. Fox News, The Daily Mail, and The New York Post were given scores under .5. This meant that the fact checkers found these outlets to be “overall untrustworthy.”

Sites - Buzzfeed - Politifact - Lists - News

Ironically, these sites were picked from Buzzfeed and Politifact lists of fake news websites, as well as news sources with the most...
(Excerpt) Read more at: NewsBusters
Wake Up To Breaking News!
Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Welcome to Long Room!

Where The World Finds Its News!