This is an awesome idea and I'm kicking myself for not thinking about it before. Very creative.
Have you made any attempt at quantifying its biases? Both whether it considers left- or right-leaning articles more significant and where it focuses most of its reporting. (Economy and the US from a first glance?)
> Have you made any attempt at quantifying its biases?
I haven't. I can share ChatGPT's evaluation of sources credibility, maybe that will give people some insights.
For example, Reuters got 9.5 (out of 10), Lifehacker 7, Oprah Mag 3.
> where it focuses most of its reporting. (Economy and the US from a first glance?)
> Have you made any attempt at quantifying its biases? Both whether it considers left- or right-leaning articles
FWIW, when I read news I often cross check on different outlets to get a sense of the span, range and sometimes media blackouts, including the ones with extreme bias (like RT reporting on Ukraine). This can give a good reading of the meta-temperature of a developing or controversial situation with a lot of propaganda and bias. In some cases, less trustworthy outlets will cover stories that aren’t narrative-friendly to more reputable publications, and sometimes, those can be really important.
For a service like this, I’d much prefer something analogous to “here’s what different outlets are saying”, rather than trying to make its own judgment about bias.
Great idea, the “here’s what different outlets are saying” feature.
Stories that aren’t narrative-friendly to main stream media.
Media blackouts to highlight propaganda and bias.
Make it easy for reader to see the "manufactured consent"!
Have you made any attempt at quantifying its biases? Both whether it considers left- or right-leaning articles more significant and where it focuses most of its reporting. (Economy and the US from a first glance?)