What has ex-Yahooer and Delicious founder Joshua Schachter been working on since leaving Yahoo last June? At least one project is a GreaseMonkey script that shows readers the political leanings of blogs and news sites on Memeorandum, a news aggregator.
Political sites are usually very biased, but the casual reader often doesn’t know which way a particular site tends to rant. With the new script, also available as a Firefox plugin, sites are shaded towards blue (whiny cowards) or red (warmongers) depending on their linking behavior.
Andy Baio, who’s been working with Schachter on the project, describes it:
The colors don’t necessarily represent each blogger’s personal views or biases. It’s a reflection of their linking activity. The algorithm looks at the stories that blogger’s linked to before, relative to all other bloggers, and groups them accordingly. People that link to things that only conservatives find interesting will be classified as bright red, even if they are personally moderate or liberal, and vice-versa. The algorithm can’t read minds, so don’t be offended if you feel misrepresented. It’s only looking at the data.
Microsoft has been testing a similar product, based on different technology, called Blews.
I’m bored with this already.
“The Liberal Media” blah blah blah blah blah
There is not doubt that this topic has been talked about and talked about over and over again, but it would be nice to have tool that could clearly show the average person just how biased politically the news, or blogs can be. It’s amazing how many times people simply take everything they read on the internet or in the paper as 100% fact.
Someone as recently as yesterday told me that the news was not biased! ha
always been a liberal bias with the larger media outlets claiming to be news reportings sources (not shows like rush limbaugh or keith olbermann…) – conservatives have fox and the wall journal, liberals have abc, nbc, msnbc, cbs, new york time, washington post, newsweek, time, npr, etc. obviously, when you look at the audience size, there has traditionally been a moderate advantage for democratic candidates. however, this year things went off the rails. while supporters of one party may love it (and deny it), longer term it is never, ever good when the major sources of “objective” news for any country make decisions regarding who “should” be in political leadership positions.
i guess he was a one trick pony.
Calling Joshua Shachter a one trick pony just shows how ignorant you really are.
O K sherlock holmes whatever you say. i have access to wikipedia too.
l
a
m
e
your right, the site is very biased and a lot of times boring if all they share is political only.
Nat
http://www.workersinc.com
Would be cooler if it did it based on the Nolan Chart rather than Red Blue or Left Right. Makes more sense and is more reflective of general public.
I actually ran the same analysis on Techmeme, and the equivalent vector seems to be Business vs Gadgets (or maybe Technology.) Techcrunch is top-three Business site. No surprise there, I guess.
I also ran it on Gabe’s other sites, WeSmirch and Ballbug. Ballbug, the similar vector is Yankeesness, and the one below that is Redsoxness. I can’t figure out what the WeSmirch factors are.
Joshua
Hats off for creating a useful webapp, but it’s in serious need of a professional designers touch.
I think Skewz.com has a much more effective way of doing this, using user perspective instead of a mathematical algorithm. After all, that’s what bias is.
Arrington, put down the doughnut and go for a jog, you puffy twink.
This rests on that assumption that most people only find interesting what they would agree with. The assumption that most people are close minded drones who find it too frustrating to at least investigate how others think. An assumption that is probably correct.
err closed minded.
This script would explode on Digg. That site is just a tad biased.
That is something almost beyond our control… but its up to the community to unite and react together to neutralize the situation.
red or blue, got a clue?
here it is: Continue the pain, vote for McCain!
f off you liberal scum
If you like Osama, vote for Obama.
Anyone who needs a Firefox plugin to help them determine the political leanings of a website probably isn’t smart enough to operate a mouse anyway.
I couldn’t agree more. Anyone that is able tie their own shoes should be able to extract which way a site leans.
On a site by site basis, sure. But I think you’re missing the point. The real value here is seeing the aggregate picture–how stories are being selectively covered by the partisans. It’s not just that people of different political leanings see the same world through different lenses, it’s that they actually see very different worlds because of source selection bias.
For what it’s worth, this is Andy Baio’s idea, I just helped with the math.
That’s right!~
Interesting idea…I’m sure some people rolled their eyes at Delicious in the beginning as well. Probably not many, but some.
The right wing has gone out of control this weekend. People are calling Obama an Arab terrorist. They are shouting out to kill him and cut of his head at McCain rallies. McCain tried to calm things down yesterday (low poll numbers or Secret Service request?) and said that Obama is a good man and his crowd booed him. Then he gives the mic to a woman and she says she’s an Arab. The desperate lies have gone too far. You cannot believe anything the McCain campaign says. They will say anything if they think it might help them win.
Phil wrote: “You cannot believe anything the McCain campaign says.”
Yes, many people *can* believe what his campaign says, just as many people can believe what the Obama campaign says. In case you are new to politics, the truth is that politicians, with very rare exception, lie. They might call it spin, exaggeration, or nuance; but a lie is a lie. And both McCain and Obama have told many lies this year. Alas, the “change” we were promised is a fantasy.
The truth is that most people believe what they *want* to believe, just as you believed erroneous stories about the McCain rally you cited. The “right wing” is mad at McCain for many reasons, but people were booing because they see him as too soft on Obama. You probably can’t believe that, because you see McCain as mean or evil or Bush 3 (or all of the above). But many on the right believe that McCain needs to grow a pair and stop pulling punches. If you want to know what the right *believes*, just read their reputable writers. I did.
Anyone who thinks the media is ‘liberal’ is a moron.
Please idiots, read “Manufacturing Consent” or just think critically about the obvious. Why would multi-billion dollar mega-corporations work against their own self interests by promoting a ‘liberal’ anti-corporate agenda?
MORONS
I don’t even know where to begin telling you all the things that are wrong with your comment. Then again, you believe something that Chomsky wrote about the media, so you are probably beyond saving anyway. On the positive side: In your world, you aren’t a moron.
Dude, when you say something less than transcendent and finish it all by labeling others with some kind of slur, it says a lot about you, but rarely anything about the others.
People who do not think the same way you do aren’t morons; believing that on any topic there can only be one school of thought kind of makes you one though.
“blue (whiny cowards) or red (warmongers)”
Said like a real libertarian