« A random thought - Locust season | Main | A thought occurs »

question of the day - Pathological Journalism?

Its a widely held observation that in this election the media isnt just following its normal bias, its acting in a way that is indistinguishable from the way that they would act if they were paid campaign workers for Obama.

In science, the issue of observer bias is central to the scientific method. Observer bias, or more simply put, the desire on the part of the person doing the experiment to get the results they wish to see in the result is a constant problem that all scientists are on constant watch to work against.

Question of the day - In this election has modern journalism just adapted itself into a form of journalistic Lysenkoism where the politics matters far more than the actual observation?

Here's my case: The "Main Stream Media", now more than ever before, is a single party, single culture group. Their observations are not based on the data they actually see as much as the result they wish to get. When they encounter data that doesnt fit the template, they attack the person that brings the data or they interpret the data as to fit the preconceived results rather than see how the data effects their hypothesis. If the data doesnt fit their hypothesis, then there is something wrong with the data. Theres a parallel for this in science, its called "Pathological Science":

"...the process in science in which "people are tricked into false results ... by subjective effects, wishful thinking or threshold interactions".

If this is the case( and I think it is), then why would you trust or believe anything that they say about this election being "in the bag" for Obama?

Posted @ October 29, 2008 10:34 AM | Current Affairs

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://varifrank.com/MT/mt-tb.cgi/1186