[–] WeekendBaker 1 points 8 points (+9|-1) ago 

How about 0% ? If I wanted political bias, I would read the party's website. Same with Dems. What I want to read is impartial and wholistic news. No slants, no narratives, just "this shot happened" And impartial expert analysis on how it impacts me.

[–] jerry 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Right up and down but people should determine what things mean on their own! The news as it works now is anti- critical thinking becuase they tell you what happened and how to feel about it.

[–] Alt-Correct 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

The only honest journalism is that which admits its own bias. I agree with you, but I just don't think there's a such thing as objective reporting.

[–] WeekendBaker 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Good point. I can live with, say, a disclaimer. "John Smith is a registered Democrat who donated to the Clinton Campaign" when covering an article about politics... or "Bill Yates has not donated to a political party in the past 4 years and is not registered with a political party".

Those are a bit draconian but could be a discussion point.

[–] parrygrin 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Yeah, anybody else notice the surge of those identifying as "independent"?

[–] edistojim 1 points 2 points (+3|-1) ago 

and 100% of them call themselves "unbiased".

[–] newoldwave 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago  (edited ago)

The other 93% are leftist propagandist.

[–] novictim 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago  (edited ago)

...and almost all of that 7% were lying because they understood that the "optics" did not look good.

[–] vastrightwing 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

When you say "journalist" do you really mean shill?

[–] DamoclesofBenghazi 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

lol like nbc scarborough and backstabber Beck

[–] issueninja 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

All 7% are weathermen on local TV stations.

[–] WanderingMitten 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

And only 3% of journalist are actually Journalist.

load more comments ▼ (8 remaining)