Apparently, my article a few days ago caused a bigger stir than I had anticipated, not at all unrelated to the fact that my wordings may not have been optimal. So, let me clarify things a bit.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-06-29
There's a difference in calling a website "unbiased" and a person "unbiased". As a person, nobody is unbiased. Neither am I.
I can, however, say that I do not select stories on OSNews based on my personal opinions about the content of the article. It's not a factor involved in the process. I decide whether it fits our scope, whether the English is of acceptable levels, more of that stuff. For rare type of articles (i.e. a review of SkyOS) these criteria are more loosely applied than for i.e. another SUSE review.
A good reporter isn't unbiased, but simply honest and open-minded about his opinions.
Yes, but only if he constraints his opinions into separate, clearly marked as such stories. You will not see me take a stab at project Xyz in its release announcement on OSNews (save for the few feeble attempts at humour); however, I might write a review of Xyz two days later in which my opinion is clearly visible.
It is this separation that leads to me saying that OSNews is unbiased. My own personal opinions on things are not reflected in OSNews' overall content, and hence OSNews is unbiased.
Member since:2006-05-12
The whole idea of being unbiased is a load of bull crap. The only people who are unbiased are the blissfully ignorant.
Not true! Bias is a prejudice, not an opinion.
A bias person says they like the design of the Ford Taurus becasue they happen to like Ford.
An unbias person says they hate the car, and they don't care who produces it.
You are basicially a genius rayiner, your bias is what limits you.
Member since:
2005-07-06
The whole idea of being unbiased is a load of bull crap. The only people who are unbiased are the blissfully ignorant. Try finding an engineer who thinks that all designs are equally valid! Competent people have opinions, and are thus biased. A good reporter isn't unbiased, but simply honest and open-minded about his opinions.
"Unbiased" reporting is the drivel you see on CNN, where the anchor spouts off about a topic with which he's unfamiliar, unbiasedly regurgitating whatever he's fed from his teleprompter. Of course he's unbiased, because he doesn't know enough about the subject to have formed an opinion! It's the crap you see where every viewpoint is presented as equally valid, despite the fact that some things are clearly better than other things.