Tag Archives: bias

PROFESSIONAL JOURNALISM’S ETHICS AND THE REALITY!!!

The Society of Professional Journalists has 4 basic guidelines:

Seek truth and report it.

Minimize harm.

Act independently.

Be accountable and transparent.

 

Summarizing:

It can be said that the objective of the journalist should be to print the truth and relevant facts as concisely as possible without misleading by omissions or out of context information.

Humans mentioned should be respected and not harmed with unproven allegations and falsehoods which is basically libelous information.

The goal should be to write in the interests of the public good and not for personal gain.

Finally journalists should own up to what they print and honestly correct any errors or mistakes which they have made along the way. If ethical choices are made or opinions offered then they should be transparent and not stated in devious ways.

 

The reality is that much of the new generation doesn’t enjoy reading lengthy articles and some questionable information is being fed the public in sound bites or short bits of information which don’t always seem logically connected.

Political reporting is increasingly biased and opinions which aren’t backed up with factual information is becoming rampant. Very briefly there is a strong tendency towards a tabloid press approach,  guilt by association, and character assassination with insults, put downs, name calling, ridicule, and humiliation all often used to destroy humans with political opinions differing from those of the left wing ideologues.

In effect, media is becoming much less objective and subjectively biased on all issues of national and foreign policy. Investigative reporting is seldom done to identify corrupt individuals, organizations, and practices so trust in the media is at an all time low. Big money has corrupted the objectivity of the media and there is no hope that circumstances will get any better in the near future as long a big tech, big banks, big corporations, big government, big academia, big celebrities, and big media are mostly in charge of information dissemination.

Big money is big power and it seems that the bigger things get the less there is justice and fair treatment of individuals with opposing views or facts and lifestyles. Mob rule is an injustice whether it is groups of individuals or groups of organized organizations who are doing it. Truthful civilized discourse is necessary in the media for an informed public. If there is too little rational truth to go around then we run the danger of falling into a misinformation  glut soon followed by chaos or ideological unjust tyranny.

Unfortunately ethical journalists are becoming few and far between. Possibly because honest, truthful, or just journalism principles do not make the most money but often lead to a rather poor existence financially. Are there more important things than money? Definitely, but that money is not freely flowing to ethical journalists these days.

The necessary moral leadership is getting more corrupt or immoral and biased by the year. At the moment the future looks grim unless there is a grass roots revival in morality and justice for those with integrity and not for those with a ruthless desire for power at any cost. The ends should not justify the means but this Machiavellian approach seems to be currently in vogue by the media.

If you liked this evergreen truth blog then read more of them, about 4500 so far, or read one or more of my evergreen truth books, especially EVERGREEN TRUTH, rays of truth in a human world filled with myths and deceptions.

For a complete readily accessible list of blogs and titles go to twitter.com/uldissprogis.

Enjoy!!!!!!

If you enjoyed this blog then here is a list of my most popular ones which you may also enjoy!!!

https://uldissprogis.com/zlist-of-my-most-popular-blogs/

WHAT WILL PROBABLY COME AFTER THE ESTABLISHMENT TABLOID LIKE PRESS?

 

The historical tabloid press was and still is a sensationalized form of current events information replete with seemingly unbelievable statements, events, and deceptive pronouncements designed to impulsively promote a buying gullible customer who wants their emotions titillated.

Today the establishment media is following in the footsteps of the tabloids and becoming more sensational and raunchier by the month. Investigative reporting and a factual reporting of current events is becoming a dying art and is being largely replaced by blatant biased opinions and editorials often accented with insults, put downs, name calling, humiliation, and ridicule of humans with opposing opinions.

Brief sometimes shocking sound bites and talking heads repeating their communal ideology is dominant in the mass media today and their listeners and viewers are decreasing in number as each human retreats into their isolated social media, cellphone world.

How long will this form of unprincipled malicious verbal combat and censorship be tolerated? Since news is increasingly a popularity contest with viewer statistics having a dominant influence, the answer is that abusive verbal combat will last as long as the public does not become bored stiff with the crappy repetitious disinformation or propaganda being published and broadcast.

The masses have always been partial to comforting lies rather than the truth so hoping that comforting lies will diminish in the future is highly unlikely. It seems that the artificial intelligence bots are becoming more intelligent than even human debaters so I see salvation in censorship by media software bots who will eventually tell humans what to say and eventually what to think.

Of course the humans in control of these bots will ultimately determine the  information inputted into the information processing system so some form of censoring ideology will have to exist and it will be human determined to some extent. If you input trashy information into a software program then your output will also be trashy information so some reliable human or computer algorithm is necessary to exclude the unreliable garbage information from being inputted.

To regain and maintain some degree of trust in the reporting of news, important questions to ask and answer are- How factual is the information? How trustworthy is the author or source of the information? Has the trustworthiness lasted many years? What is the goal of the article? What are the reputable sources and information which seems to back up the purpose or goal  of the article or presentation? Will this information be promoted via podcast, video, or written format and where will it appear?

Note: the objective purpose of any communication should be to promote the truth about factual information but the reality is that ideology often plays a dominant role in the communication and reality is often misrepresented to fit a politically correct mold. Effective useful communication means that the facts are truthful and the communicator is trusted as somewhat of an expert in his or her field of expertise.

An alternative media with anti monopolistic information censorship and ideology has arisen and is doing rather well but it will probably never become what used to be the establishment media and widely respected by the average human. Once trust in the establishment media is lost it is almost an impossible task to get it back any time soon.

It takes more aggressive searching to find and use alternative media but thankfully it is still there and surviving if not thriving. As long as someone is permitted to exercise moral free speech on the internet and present opposing views in a civilized manner, I see no great need to panic and believe that all media is just going to become and stay a biased cesspool of censored unprincipled politics, news, and general information.

The European Union is already censoring free alternative media so please support free alternative media with your money because the same fate may befall the United States alternative media in the not too distant future.

Some sense of order will probably arise out of the current chaos so promote with your money all the sources which you feel are as truthful as is reasonably possible.

Bots can also be stupid or malicious and try to trap you in an isolated echo chamber of information which you like rather than also expose you to information which you should know about to be truly informed. Media bots whose main purpose is to make money try to keep you satisfied with the world which you like or agree with so historical brainwashing by bots this time will continue into the foreseeable future.

Artificial intelligence is becoming smarter than the average human so bots will rule the media of the future to a very large extent.

If you liked this evergreen truth blog then read more of them, about 4400 so far, or read one or more of my evergreen truth books, especially EVERGREEN TRUTH, rays of truth in a human world filled with myths and deceptions.

For a complete readily accessible list of blogs and titles go to twitter.com/uldissprogis.

Enjoy!!!!!!

If you enjoyed this blog then here is a list of my most popular ones which you may also enjoy!!!

https://uldissprogis.com/zlist-of-my-most-popular-blogs/

BIG MONEY IS PROBABLY WHY RESTORING TRUST IN JOURNALISM IS IMPOSSIBLE!!!

Ann Curry makes a plea for a return to truthful journalism in an era of big money corporate control over the establishment media and internet. Establishment media is incredibly biased and opinionated and often uses dubious statistical results and opinion polls to back up their propaganda which has existed for years and is mostly left wing biased. Advertising revenue and viewing statistics largely determine what is presented to the public and the ultimate result is that the information keeps you ignorant and uninformed on facts but is rich in politically correct ideology.

To put it bluntly, most media is no longer trusted and restoring that trust will have to take many years of truthful reporting or the establishment media will never be trusted again.

The only way to restore credible journalism is to support credible internet media with your monetary donations or subscriptions and promote alternate truthful media or websites with tens of thousands of subscribers.

The truth is not popular and is either right or wrong and if you pursue it then you will probably soon begin to call yourself an independent who agrees with the truth that the left and right have to offer or the best truth that the conservative and liberal have to offer.

If you liked this evergreen truth blog then read more of them, about 4400 so far, or read one or more of my evergreen truth books, especially EVERGREEN TRUTH, rays of truth in a human world filled with myths and deceptions.

For a complete readily accessible list of blogs and titles go to twitter.com/uldissprogis.

Enjoy!!!!!!

If you enjoyed this blog then here is a list of my most popular ones which you may also enjoy!!!

https://uldissprogis.com/zlist-of-my-most-popular-blogs/

WHY MOST PSYCHOLOGICAL STUDIES ON AGGRESSION, ETC. ARE SEVERELY FLAWED!!!

Aggression: n. pursuing a goal(s) forcefully and/or threateningly which may include (body contact and/or violence) and/or a ((verbal threat(s) and/or verbal attack(s)) and/or physical attack(s))

Esteem: v. to respect and admire

Selfesteem: v. to respect and admire oneself

Respect: v. to sense and frequently communicate that a human has (much value and/or moral goodness) and/or (much skill(s) in a (profession and/or activity)) and/or is experienced and has few severe personality flaws and the human is dependable

Admire: v. to sense respect and attraction and to sense a relatively large intensity pleasure because of (good and/or moral behavior) and/or professional excellence

One real example of psychologists trying to link high or low selfesteem to aggression shows how easy it is to get contradictory results. Baumeister 1999, 2000, 2002, 2007 claimed to show that high selfesteem is linked to greater aggressiveness and Donnellan 2005 and Trzesniewski 2006 claimed to show that low selfesteem is linked to greater aggressiveness.

 

Psychologists never accurately define what they mean by aggression and selfesteem which is what I have done and then try to set up questionnaires which supposedly measure the degree and type of aggression and selfesteem. Without an accurate definition of the words that they are using they are frankly groping in the dark. Frankly the two concepts are so complex that no validated correspondence between them is possible since there are too many interdependent variables at play.

 

Aggression can be physical and/or mental and this means that combinations of both approaches are possible. There is physical violence in various degrees of intensity and type, there are verbal threats in various degrees of intensity and type, there are verbal attacks in various degrees of intensity and type, and there are physical gesture threats in various degrees of intensity and type and then there are combinations of these aggressions which constitute the total possibilities of aggressive behavior. How can you possibly verbally determine the degree of aggressiveness and the type of aggressiveness that you are questioning about with any degree of accuracy? It is mission impossible.

 

Attempting to find some link or correspondence between selfesteem and aggression is even more problematic and impossible to do. Selfesteem is respecting and admiring yourself which means that you are personally judging your value and/or moral goodness which also means that you are judging how skilled you are in your job or profession and/or daily life. You are also making a personal assumption that you have minor personality flaws. Personality flaws theoretically should lower your selfesteem if you have many personality flaws. Of course you could be delusional and assume that you have no personality flaws so your selfesteem evaluation on a questionnaire would not be remotely connected with the reality of your life.

 

How intensely do you admire yourself and what things do you admire yourself for? Can you really determine how much or the intensity with which you admire yourself and for what things in life from a questionnaire?

 

So how many variables are at play when discussing aggression and selfesteem? An uncontrollable boatload. Further you could ask the question whether introverts or extroverts have higher selfesteem and who are more aggressive? You would probably assume that extroverts are more aggressive socially than introverts and maybe also assume that they have more selfesteem.

 

While sociable celebrities could be considered aggressive with high selfesteem you could also assume that introverts have higher selfesteem than your common extrovert because they frankly don’t want to put up with social drama, are more selective in their friendships, and are often very competent workers proud of their work. Unless you are talking about shy introverts who may indeed have less selfesteem than the average population I would venture to say that indeed common introverts in general may have more selfesteem than your common babbling extrovert.

 

In conclusion: For a given individual you can probably evaluate his or her degree of aggressiveness and selfesteem relatively accurately given enough exposure to them over a period of time. However, when you try to make correspondences between exceedingly complex psychological concepts and try to make general assumptions about them in a general population then you are doomed to fail miserably most of the time. Other psychological studies about hope, love, happiness, etc. are just as impossible to do and get verifiable results. Not only do cultural differences affect the outcome but other variables such as age, gender, current and past emotional state, financial status,  job or career, family, morality, health, etc.

 

There are frankly too many variables interacting when it comes to human interaction so a scientific approach is frankly not even remotely possible.

Psychologists like to sound scientific by using correlational or statistical numbers but they a not being at all being objective and their results show a very subjective bias which is just not valid worldwide for all kinds of human populations.

If you liked this evergreen truth blog then read more of them, about 4400 so far, or read one or more of my evergreen truth books, especially EVERGREEN TRUTH, rays of truth in a human world filled with myths and deceptions.

For a complete readily accessible list of blogs and titles go to twitter.com/uldissprogis.

Enjoy!!!!!!

If you enjoyed this blog then here is a list of my most popular ones which you may also enjoy!!!

https://uldissprogis.com/zlist-of-my-most-popular-blogs/

UPDATED NEW QUOTE BY ULDIS SPROGIS 815!!!

fotorcreated

If you liked this evergreen truth blog then read more of them, about 3800 so far, or read one or more of my evergreen truth books, especially EVERGREEN TRUTH, rays of truth in a human world filled with myths and deceptions.

For a complete readily accessible list of blogs and titles go to twitter.com/uldissprogis.

Enjoy!!!!!!

If you enjoyed this blog then here is a list of my most popular ones which you may also enjoy!!!

https://uldissprogis.com/zlist-of-my-most-popular-blogs/

THE TRUTH ABOUT BIAS

biases

Bias: n. a subjective personal favoritism for a subset(s)

We all have a personal way of thinking and doing things which all depends on our individual experiences, beliefs, and opinions and this is called personal bias or subjectivity. Someone from a different culture or background may have many biases which are much different than our own so we should learn to respect those biases and not always try to prove that our biases are the only ones to have.

Most conflicts, arguments, and misunderstandings stem from the fact that humans have different biases which have to be dealt with in a sometimes diplomatic way and not through an outright assault on emotionally deeply felt biases. A challenge to deeply held biases will be met with sometimes ferocious defensive actions and you should learn to communicate in a way which will not inflame those biases which sometimes may also be called prejudices.

Biases not grounded in many facts but emotionally deeply felt are the hardest to deal with because reason, logic, and relevant facts will frequently not be convincing enough to change those biases. The media, politics in general, religion, and sports is frequently not something which you can talk logically about because they are strongly held emotional beliefs frequently not based on many facts and subject to very little change.

If a human has very many biases different than your own then the probability that you can have a successful intimate relationship with that human are very slim. If you have a relationship it will probably be a very tempestuous and rather unsatisfactory one.

A scientific bias is preferable to a non scientific one but you have to be careful about statistics which can lead to inaccurate conclusions because there is no one to one correspondence with frequently vaguely defined variables. The scientific method is not very useful in human affairs because empathy, anger, frustration, revenge, poverty, discrimination, love, hate, etc is poorly defined and does not lend itself to manipulation with mathematical formulas. You can’t prove morality mathematically and test it in a laboratory.

Science will never prove the necessity for a secular moral code or morality for humans so that they can peacefully interact with one another in society. A moral code for young impressionable minds is necessary so that humans react impulsively in life situations and don’t always have to be asking -is what I am about to do right or wrong?

The questioning scientific approach to situation ethics is dysfunctional because it is so relative and almost any situation can be justified under certain circumstances. The end frequently justifies the means and this is a morally corrupt way of running the world of human affairs.

Except in emergency situations it should be immoral to destroy biodiversity, lie, be inefficient, steal, be adulterous if married, and murder. Prove that mathematically and scientifically in a lab. You can’t!!!!!! But you can try to get a consensus in society that a secular moral code is a good thing to teach young impressionable minds.

If you liked this evergreen truth blog then read more of them, approximately 700 so far, and one or more of my evergreen truth books, especially COMMON SENSE, rays of truth in a human world filled with myths and deceptions.

Enjoy!!!!!!

 

THE TRUTH ABOUT STEREOTYPES

stereotype_tshirt-p23572351

Stereotype: v. to identify a human(s) and/or subset(s) by one personality characteristic and/or one generalization which is frequently not very accurate

Hispanics are alcoholics, women are carers, and cities are industrial wastelands are stereotypes which don’t give an accurate complete description of many Hispanics, women, and cities. They are stereotypes or broad generalizations which are not accurate in many individual instances.

Name calling is also a form of stereotyping and if you call someone stupid, crazy, or incompetent they may in fact only do some stupid, crazy, and incompetent things but labeling them as being compulsive about it is wrong and a stereotype.

Beliefs in stereotypes, especially of ethnic groups, is also the foundation of prejudice and once you strongly believe in a stereotype it is very hard to change that belief because you have developed an emotional attachment to it and don’t want to or aren’t smart enough to change it.

Stereotypes are popular because they create a simplistic view of the world which doesn’t require much logical thinking. Unfortunately stereotypes will handicap a human who uses too many of them and he or she will frequently be thought of as not very smart or even prejudiced if the stereotypes are unflattering generalities of humans and things.

Historically all my black tenants have been bad tenants but I have also had many bad white tenants and the real reason that they are bad tenants is because all of them have been poor financially with lousy jobs. I have learned not to stereotype humans based on race but I have learned to stereotype them based on income. If a tenant is poor financially then the probabability that they will be a bad tenant is close to 100%. I have learned the hard way through the school of hard knocks that money is more important than race and I always ask and confirm monthly income, time on the job, and rental history.

 

If you liked this evergreen truth blog then read more of them, approximately 700 so far, and one or more of my evergreen truth books, especially COMMON SENSE, rays of truth in a human world filled with myths and deceptions.

Enjoy!!!!!!