zenpundit.com » Blog Archive » News from left, center and right? this site provides links

News from left, center and right? this site provides links

[ by Charles Cameron — see also post on left, center, right news maps ]

I ran across the AllSides site recently. Their aim seems laudable:

Unlike regular news services, AllSides exposes bias and provides multiple angles on the same story so you can quickly get the full picture, not just one slant.

At the moment, their focus is on Obama and the wiretap:

Obama Denies Wiretap

From the Center
Trump wants congressional probe of claims on Obama, won’t comment further
President Trump called Sunday for a congressional investigation of his claims that predecessor Barack Obama had him wiretapped…
USA Today Bias: Center

From the Right
The Obama Camp’s Disingenuous Denials on FISA Surveillance of Trump
President Trump’s early Saturday morning tweeting has exploded to the forefront an uncovered scandal I’ve been talking about since…
Guest Writer – Right Bias: Lean Right

From the Left
Obama Refutes Allegation That He Wiretapped Trump Tower During Campaign
U.S. President Donald Trump accused predecessor Barack Obama on Saturday of wiretapping him during the late stages of the 2016…
Huffington Post Bias: Left

They also feature a host of topics you can explore, such as the environment — and there you can find not only relevant news, but also:

  • Think Tanks from the LEFT
  • Think Tanks from the CENTER
  • Think Tanks from the RIGHT
  • Those pages in turn will take you to:

  • The Environmental Defense Fund
  • The Council on Environmental Quality
  • Brookings Institution
  • World Wildlife Fund
  • The Cato Institute
  • The Heritage Foundation
  • Are Zenpundit readers already familiar with this site? Does it strike you as fair and balanced? Do you know of other sites that serve the same or a related purpose? Any other comments?

    3 Responses to “News from left, center and right? this site provides links”

    1. Cheryl Rofer Says:

      I am not familiar with the site, but one potential problem is how they define “Left”, “Center”, and “Right.” Another is that facts matter. So which sites/writers get facts correct? That doesn’t seem to be part of the evaluation.
      Another potential problem is “fair and balanced.” (Those words, in themselves, imply a familiarity with a well-known hardly balanced news outlet.) It’s simply not true that the “left” and “right” news outlets in the US are equally far from the “center.” This is shown quite nicely in a recent CJR article on a Harvard study.
      I can and do check out Fox News or Breitbart, or whatever Breitbart-in-the-White-House has to say. Followers of those outlets can also check out the New York Times or Washington Post, or to savor a bit more danger, Mother Jones or the Huffington Post. But what that study says is that they probably won’t.
      So I don’t see the utility of a site like this.

    2. Grurray Says:

      For think tanks, how about instead of Left to Right, we look at them in terms of four archetypes, such as was discussed awhile back? Walter Russell Mead’s four traditions from his book “Special Providence” perhaps, but I suppose there are many other ways to slice it. This might still fall short but might provide a more suitable explanation of where Libertarian outfits like Cato fit in.
      As for news reporting, I’m skeptical of any effort to capture and classify the middle ground. If these curators want to try then I wish them the best of luck. I believe absolute truth exists, but, like de Montaigne, my best effort of finding what it might be is, ‘Que sais-je?’

    3. carl Says:

      I started to read the CJR article Cheryl cited and found the four authors stating they “studied” 1.25 million, that is 1,250,000 stories published online from April 1, 2015 through election day. That figures out to each author having “studied” 312,500 each. That isn’t possible. They programmed their computers to look for things they wanted their computers to look for and the machines spit out the data. I suppose that is like sizing a net to only snag 12 foot sharks and then saying the catch proves there aren’t any 8 footers in the water.

    Switch to our mobile site