Data-driven isn't a black and white thing. Many journalists do not have rigorous training in the areas they cover or a strong mathematical background. And many writers, especially when it comes to op-eds, care very little for the data or are extremely sloppy with it, often favoring ideological arguments or cherry-picked positions.
When you have someone with Silver's abilities and statistics background running the show as opposed to just being some reference who gets marginalized by those doing the writing or managing the writing, you have the potential for something great. Ezra Klein has already shown the sort of strong data-backed journalism he can produce during his time at Wonkblog and this only allows for his team to have their own platform and own website with a strong tech team that supports that they are doing. Now this is a new thing so the eventual outcome is yet to be seen, but to say they aren't trying something different is just wrong, regardless of your political persuasions.
Other differences include with Vox a goal that seems to be more education and explanation oriented than just your typical news (again going with some of the Wonkblog themes).
Basically by using the data as a starting point instead of opinion or ideology or whatever and then providing those external data sources or studies to back up what is written. Basically if done right the writing is more scientific than it would otherwise be and thus, more factual.
As for even coverage of everything and underlying political bias in the selection of stories, it will depend on the writer. I'll be the first to admit that some of these guys have clear political biases, but at the same time they are able to think and write to a higher standard by focusing on the facts and at the end of the day if the writing is not biased by their ideologies, does it matter? The only thing left for the reader is to make sure they read other sources to to perhaps catch up on things not covered on one particular site , but having multiple sources for news, etc. is always a good idea anyway (and in the age of the Internet who reads only one site or paper anyway?).
id have to see an example of how data-driven news actually works to form a real opinion. for now i like it in theory but frankly doubt whether it can really make the news more objective. from what i've seen "real unbiased news" is dead.:skull:
what we have is media that in essence works for one side or the other. people lament FOX news, but you have to realize it wasnt born i a vacuum, it was born in an environment where the populace had a sense that things were pulled way left in the media. pulling it way right, perhaps balances the overall picture.
so back to your quote, i think it does matter. i think political bias runs deep these days and it can't help but bleed into what one writes.
I think this may just cause a resurgence in unbiased news. There have been anumber of world news broadcasters come to the American market because I think the people are achingfor it.
If the reader is aware of the bias, it can help offset it. If the articles are backed by stronger evidence and that evidence is shared in the articles, the reader then has a venue to follow up on that evidence and confirm the conclusions of any article for themselves (in a much easier and more accessible way compared to your traditional news article). Check out some of the posts at sites like Wonkblog or even now on the actual Vox and 538 sites to see what they are about. By the way, if you are not familiar with Nate Silver, his achievements have been highly praised especially when it came to his statistical models for the last couple of elections- in the last two presidential elections he got 1 state wrong if I remember correctly? And his congressional predictions are equally impressive relative to everyone else making predictions. Bias or not, at the end of the day his use of data painted a more accurate picture, at least in those instances (yes, I see how you may view that as confirmation bias, but his work extends beyond just those elections).
Yeah, they said Fox News was doomed to fail in the beginning - boy were they wrong!!!
Fox isn't news.
Similar threads
