Wikipedia Liberal Bias смотреть последние обновления за сегодня на .
I love Wikipedia! I even donated to it. But I won't donate again, now that I've learned how BIASED Wikipedia has become. ———— To make sure you see the new weekly video from Stossel TV, sign up here: 🤍 ———— No right-leaning outlets, Fox News Politics, the Daily Wire, the Daily Caller, etc… is considered “reliable” by Wikipedia. None. But even some of the most extreme leftist outlets get a "reliable" badge like “Jacobin," a self-described SOCIALIST outlet. Vox, Buzzfeed News, and Slate are also deemed “reliable” by Wikipedia. Editors may base stories on their reporting. Why did Wikipedia become so biased? Veteran Wikipedian Jonathan Weiss tells me that the site, like academia, has been captured by leftists. Some Wikipedia administrators even brag on their profiles, "this user is a socialist." Another put up images idolizing communist murderers Che Guevara and Vladimir Lenin. These administrators make final decisions about what counts as “reliable," and what goes on Wikipedia. That’s why for years, Wiki's "communism" page made NO mention of the millions killed by that ideology. US border facilities are listed under "concentration camps,” on the same page as Wikipedia’s holocaust facilities. Can we fix this? Wikipedia is supposed to be a site that "anyone can edit," so I made an edit. You can find out what happened in the video above.
Wikipedia is the #1 research tool in the world, boasting over 18 billion views per month. It also pushes a radical left-wing agenda. Crowder and crew expose how they do it. #Wikipedia #Bias #FactCheck Go to 🤍 and use promo code “Crowder15” to get 15% off your next order. Try the Walther! Visit 🤍 to shop online or use the dealer locator to find a Walther dealer near you! NEW MERCH! 🤍 GET TODAY'S SHOW NOTES with SOURCES: 🤍 Join MugClub to watch this show every day! 🤍 Subscribe to my podcast on iTunes: 🤍 FOLLOW ME: Website: 🤍 Twitter: 🤍 Instagram: 🤍 TikTok: 🤍 Snapchat: 🤍 Facebook: 🤍 Shoutout: 🤍 Music by 🤍Pogo
Is Wikipedia a reliable source, or is it as prone to bias and false information as any other media outlet? In this video, we explore the fundamental problems of modern Wikipedia, and discover how the website regularly lies to its readers. One of the most basic lies Wikipedia tells is that it has a neutrality policy - in reality, the policy has glaring flaws. It's frequently used to assert liberal left worldviews as fact, as if they were the neutral statements of truth. On issues including (but not limited to) race and crime, drug legalization, and even religion, Wikipedia presents unbalanced and in some cases outright misleading information. The website has gotten to the point that its own co-founder, Larry Sanger, even wrote an article verbally destroying it. The article, titled 'Wikipedia Is Badly Biased' will be linked below. Other sources, including the many different studies documenting Wikipedia's left wing bias, are also linked. Follow me on other platforms! Telegram - 🤍 Bitchute - 🤍 Odysee - 🤍 Gab - 🤍 Citations: Wikipedia Is Badly Biased by Larry Sanger - 🤍 Do Experts or Collective Intelligence Write with More Bias? Evidence from Encyclopedia Britannica and Wikipedia - 🤍 Ideology and Composition Among an Online Crowd: Evidence from Wikipedians - 🤍 Wikipedia Source Analysis - 🤍 Differential rates of disciplinary action reveals evidence of political bias in Wikipedia's arbitration enforcement - 🤍 Music used in this video (in chronological order): Serenity - Prod. Riddiman Journey to Rome Part I - Jeff Van Dyck Autumn - Jeff Van Dyck Rome HQ - Jeff Van Dyck
Wikipedia is big cringe. There are systematic reasons why it is the way it is, but I mean also some articles just make you think they must've been written by furries or something... I don't use it at all anymore, removed it from my bookmarks and don't plan on using it ever again. DONATE NOW: 🤍 💰😎👌💯 WEBSITE: 🤍 🌐❓🔎 Here's the boomer blogpost I mentioned by Larry Sanger co-founder and long-time critic of Wikipedia: 🤍
Vanessa Otero set out to rank an ever-growing partisan media landscape, with the belief that an informed public is a better public. Learn more about this story at 🤍 Find more videos like this at 🤍 Follow Newsy on Facebook: 🤍 Follow Newsy on Twitter: 🤍
The Peter Schiff Show Podcast - Episode 89a I forgot to mention this, but the Wikipedia page also has a section on my gold predictions that starts in 2012 with gold at $1,700. This is meant to make me look bad as gold is currently trading around $1,200. But there is no mention of the fact that when I first started recommending gold to my clients it was below $300. In fact, there are numerous videos on youtube that show me on CNBC recommending gold when it was still below $500, and numerous articles written by me online going back to 2004 when I forecast gold prices, which at that time we still below $400, would rise to $1,000 per ounce. But those accurate forecast would make me look good, so they are not included in Wikipedia 🤍
Freddie Sayers meets Larry Sanger. Listen to the podcast version: 🤍 Read the full article here: 🤍 Chances are, if you’ve ever been on the internet, you’ve visited Wikipedia. It is the world’s fifth largest website, pulling in an estimated 6.1 billion followers per month and serves as a cheat sheet for almost any topic in the world. So great is the online encyclopaedia’s influence is so great that it is the biggest and “most read reference work in history”, with as many as 56 million editions. But the truth about this supposedly neutral purveyor of information is a little more complex. Historically, Wikipedia has been written and monitored by a community of volunteers who collaborated and contested competing claims with one another. In the words of Wikipedia’s co-founder, Larry Sanger who spoke to Freddie Sayers on LockdownTV, these volunteers would “battle it out”. This battle of ideas on Wikipedia’s platform formed a crucial part of the encyclopaedia’s commitment to neutrality, which according to Sanger, was abandoned after 2009. In the years since, on issues ranging from Covid to Joe Biden, it has become increasingly partisan, primarily espousing an establishment viewpoint that increasingly represents "propaganda". This, says Sanger, is why he left the site in 2007, describing it as “broken beyond repair”. Follow UnHerd on social media: Twitter: 🤍 Facebook: 🤍 #wikipedia #covid19 #bias
Larry Sanger co-founded Wikipedia in 2001 alongside Jimmy Wales and now says the crowdsourcing project has betrayed its original mission by reflecting the views of the establishment. He claims teams of Democratic-leaning volunteers remove content that isn't to their liking, including information about scandals linked to President Biden. For our entire archive of full episodes and bonus content subscribe below. 🤍 Kush and Chemtrails merchandise available exclusively at our web store. 🤍
📖 Order my book, "The True Story of Fake News" from Amazon ➡️ here 🤍 (ad) ⚠️ Order your shirts here ➡️: 🤍 💲 Sponsor me on Patreon here ➡️ 🤍 Order my book "Hollywood Propaganda: How TV, Movies, and Music Shape Our Culture" from Amazon here: 🤍 or download the e-book from Kindle, iBooks, Google Play, or Nook. Order my book "The Liberal Media Industrial Complex" here: 🤍 (ad) Mark Dice is an independent media analyst and bestselling author of "Hollywood Propaganda: How TV, Movies, and Music Shape Our Culture.” He has a bachelor's degree in Communication from California State University and was the first conservative YouTuber to reach 1 million subscribers (in 2017). He has been featured on Fox News, the History Channel, E! Entertainment, the Drudge Report, and news outlets around the world. This video description and the pinned comment contains Amazon and/or other affiliate links, which means if you click them and purchase the product(s), Mark will receive a small commission. Copyright © 2021 by Mark Dice. All Rights Reserved.
Jimmy Wales is the co-founder of Wikipedia. Please support this podcast by checking out our sponsors: - Hexclad Cookware: 🤍 and use code LEX to get 10% off - Eight Sleep: 🤍 to get special savings - House of Macadamias: 🤍 and use code LEX to get 20% off your first order TRANSCRIPT: 🤍 EPISODE LINKS: Jimmy's Twitter: 🤍 Jimmy's Wikipedia page: 🤍 Donate to Wikipedia: 🤍 WT.Social: 🤍 PODCAST INFO: Podcast website: 🤍 Apple Podcasts: 🤍 Spotify: 🤍 RSS: 🤍 Full episodes playlist: 🤍 Clips playlist: 🤍 OUTLINE: 0:00 - Introduction 0:47 - Origin story of Wikipedia 6:51 - Design of Wikipedia 13:44 - Number of articles on Wikipedia 19:55 - Wikipedia pages for living persons 40:48 - ChatGPT 54:19 - Wikipedia's political bias 1:00:23 - Conspiracy theories 1:13:28 - Facebook 1:21:46 - Twitter 1:42:22 - Building Wikipedia 1:56:55 - Wikipedia funding 2:08:15 - ChatGPT vs Wikipedia 2:12:56 - Larry Sanger 2:18:28 - Twitter files 2:21:20 - Government and censorship 2:35:44 - Adolf Hitler's Wikipedia page 2:47:26 - Future of Wikipedia 2:59:29 - Advice for young people 3:06:50 - Meaning of life SOCIAL: - Twitter: 🤍 - LinkedIn: 🤍 - Facebook: 🤍 - Instagram: 🤍 - Medium: 🤍 - Reddit: 🤍 - Support on Patreon: 🤍
Please leave a like, comment and/or subscribe if you want to support the channel! Also follow me on: 🤍 🤍 Buy me a coffee on: 🤍 Citations: Human rights in the Soviet Union - Wikipedia Response to the Death of Robert Conquest (montclair.edu)
The Peter Schiff Show Podcast - Episode 89a I forgot to mention this, but the Wikipedia page also has a section on my gold predictions that starts in 2012 with gold at $1,700. This is meant to make me look bad as gold is currently trading around $1,200. But there is no mention of the fact that when I first started recommending gold to my clients it was below $300. In fact, there are numerous videos on youtube that show me on CNBC recommending gold when it was still below $500, and numerous articles written by me online going back to 2004 when I forecast gold prices, which at that time we still below $400, would rise to $1,000 per ounce. But those accurate forecast would make me look good, so they are not included in Wikipedia _ PLEASE click here to SUBSCRIBE to my channel.. Economic collapse, money, politics, political, debt,Dollar collapse, Alex Jones, USA, China, United States, Bank, Reserve, Freedom, America, Gerald Celente, Peter Schiff, Fed, Government, financial times, economic depression, economic news, global financial crisis, financial news, business news, stock market, global, economist, Illuminati, Antichrist, Iran, Ron Paul, Business, war, Market, Economic, Crisis, Meltdown, Martial Laẉ ...
This chart, from a paper by political scientists Matt Grossmann and David A. Hopkins, shows that governance usually means bigger government, even when Republicans are in charge. Source: 🤍 Further reading: "Why Democrats and Republicans don't understand each other" by Ezra Klein 🤍 Narrated by Ezra Klein Produced by Joe Posner and Joss Fong Subscribe to our channel! 🤍 Vox.com is news website that helps you cut through the noise and understand what's really driving the events in the headlines. Check out 🤍 to get up to speed on everything from Kurdistan to the Kim Kardashian app. Follow Vox on Twitter: 🤍 Or on Facebook: 🤍
conservapedia is a far right version of wikipedia. let's read some absolutely unhinged articles. buckle up. it gets wild. Become a youtube member: 🤍 Email list: 🤍 Patreon: 🤍 Twitter: 🤍 Twitch: 🤍 Telltale: 🤍 Telltale Fireside Chat: 🤍 Telltale Unfiltered: 🤍 Telltale Reads: 🤍 TikTok: 🤍 Discord: 🤍 PayPal: 🤍 Teespring: 🤍 Podcast on iTunes: 🤍 Podcast on SoundCloud: 🤍 Voicemail: 1-800-701-8573
This is a tier list of nine of the largest and most active Youtube history channels, based on criticism at r/badhistory and other platforms, and what I consider to be best history Youtuber practice. Channels scored C or D can still be useful for learning history; they just don't do it as well as I think they should. Channels scored E or F should be avoided, in my opinion. Timestamps 0:00 Start 00:07 Introduction 11:39 Simple History [some bad history, oversimplification, plagiarism, insufficient sources] 15:38 Extra Credits [bad history, plagiarism, insufficient sources] 24:45 Kraut [bad history, strong political bias, insufficient sources] 31:06 Overly Sarcastic Productions [bad history, insufficient sources] 37:10 Kings & Generals [bad history, insufficient sources] 45:39 HomeTeam History [some bad history, speculation, some bad sources] 1:00:49 Whatifalthist [very bad history, strong political bias, insufficient sources, racism] 1:15:53 History Buffs [bad history, strong political bias, lack of sources] 1:22:11 Mark Felton [bad history, plagiarism] 1:28:05 Channels I didn't cover [not a history channel, too small, lack of activity, lack of presence on r/badhistory] 1:36:12 Conclusion _ Discord 🤍 _ Patreon | 🤍 _ Sources 🤍 _ Videos cited Creating content: Making content accessible 🤍 Should YouTube Historians Be Held to the Same Standards as Academic Historians? 🤍 The Monsieur Z/Emperor Tigerstar Incident (All Tweets & Full Analysis) 🤍 Response to HomeTeam History on the Ishango & Lebombo bones #1 | arithmetic & symbolic numeracy 🤍 Response to HomeTeam History on the Ishango & Lebombo bones #2 | Lunar calendars 🤍 Recommended channels 🤍 🤍 🤍 🤍 Relevant subreddits 🤍 🤍 Media sources 🤍 🤍 🤍 🤍 🤍 🤍
look at chad chad!!! 🤍 today (we're looking at) chad chad's new favorite website, conservapedia editing help by SuperChaoticToonz: 🤍 u can support me on patreon if u want! 🤍 -SOCIALS- super exclusive second channel: 🤍 not as exclusive twitter: 🤍 publicly owned twitch streams: 🤍 instagam: 🤍
Mr. Beat and Mr. Barris explain political spectrums and why the whole left versus right paradigm does more harm than good. Be sure to subscribe to This is Barris! 🤍 Thanks again to Mr. Barris for helping me make this video! Have an idea for a video Mr. Beat should do? Your idea gets picked when you donate on Patreon: 🤍 Donate on Paypal: 🤍 Buy Mr. Beat T-shirts, coffee mugs, etc.: 🤍 Reddit: 🤍 Mr. Beat's band: 🤍 Mr. Beat on Twitter: 🤍 Mr. Beat on Facebook: 🤍 Mr. Beat on Instagram: 🤍 Mr. Beat's Discord server: 🤍 Produced by Matt Beat. All images by Matt Beat, found in the public domain, or used under fair use guidelines. Music by Electric Needle Room (Mr. Beat's band). Electric Needle Room's new children's album, "Just Kidding Around:" Bandcamp: 🤍 Spotify: 🤍 YouTube: 🤍 Apple: 🤍 Amazon: 🤍 #politics #leftwing #rightwing Sources/further reading: 🤍 🤍 🤍 🤍 🤍 🤍 What do people mean when they say that they are “right wing” or “left wing” or on The Right or The Left? Well, the whole left vs. right political spectrum started during the French Revolution. For more about this, I’m going to send you to Barris, from the channel This is Barris! So HERE is Barris. Thank you for having me over Mr. Beat! To discover the origins of the left v right paradigm, one must go as far as 1789 with the creation of the National Constituent Assembly, whose main task was to create a constitution. Now, while France is proudly republican today and any trace of royalty has long been guillotined away, that wasn’t always the case and a large portion of the population supported the King, or at least those who represented that population. As such when on November 11th, 1789, the assembly had to vote on whether the constitution would grant the King an absolute veto or a partial veto, those who favored an absolute veto were asked to sit on the right of the President of the Assembly and those who favored a partial veto, which was the more radical position, were asked to sit on the President of the Assembly. This wasn’t done symbolically but… to make the vote count easier for the President of the Assembly who felt a bit overwhelmed by the 1,500 deputies. And just like that, France started this idea of change vs tradition, of liberalism vs conservatism which still shapes the political landscape to this day! It would take another century before the left vs right spectrum became popular outside of France. In the beginning of the 20th century, as revolutions were sprouting across the world, the press and academics needed a quick way to categorize the different ideologies that were fighting each other, especially as these ideologies, both left and right, became increasingly radical. For example, the Bolsheviks, who loved anything related to the French revolution, immediately embraced the leftwing v rightwing spectrum but used themselves as the center. In England, however, it took longer to become popular and books only started referencing it in the late 1920s. Adoption in the US was just as slow but eventually, as partisanship increased in the 1960s during the civil rights movement, the idea of a left vs right political spectrum cemented along the beliefs of both parties. Well, often the political spectrum looks something like this. On the left side of politics, you tend to see ideas like liberty, equality (aka egalitarianism), progress, and internationalism. On the right side of politics, you tend to see ideas like authority, hierarchy, tradition, and nationalism. On the left, you often see reform, while on the right, you often see reaction. Those on the left tend to want MORE government involvement to make society better. They want it more top down, while those on the right tend to want LESS government involvement to make society better. They want it bottom up. Ideas on the left are often called “liberal” and ideas on the right are often called “conservative.”
"Reality has a well-known liberal bias" Stephen Colbert at the White House Correspondents' Dinner
Can Greg 'the almighty Wikipedia editor' find a way to save humanity with his free encyclopaedic exploits after a digital apocalypse? An absurdist, animated, comedy about spacemen fist-fighting God, aliens obsessed with jet-skis, billion dollar housing, Wikipedia, and fascist ducks... welcome to: THE FUTURE OF EVERYTHING! Aboriginal and Torres Straight Islander viewers are advised that this program contains voices of people who have died. 'THE FUTURE OF EVERYTHING' is a five-part series: Ep 1 - Friday 12 May 9am AEST Ep 2 - Friday 19 May 9am AEST Ep 3 - Friday 26 May 9am AEST Ep 4 - Tuesday 30 May 9am AEST Ep 5 - Friday 2nd June 9am AEST Ep 3 'Blackout' - Starring the voices of Nath Valvo, Sammy J, Andrea Powell, Sarah Walker, Nicholas Colla, Mike Greaney, and narrated by Uncle Jack Charles. GROUSE HOUSE: Instagram: 🤍 Facebook: 🤍 Twitter: 🤍 TikTok: 🤍 Website: 🤍 MIKE GREANEY (CREATOR): Instagram: 🤍 YouTube: 🤍Grichael.Meaney TikTok: 🤍 Twitter: 🤍 LATENITE (PRODUCTION COMPANY): Website: 🤍 THE FUTURE OF EVERYTHING: DEDICATED TO Uncle Jack Charles. WRITTEN AND DIRECTED BY Mike Greaney PRODUCTION COMPANY LateNite PRODUCED BY Nicholas Colla, Nicolette Minster EXECUTIVE PRODUCED BY Chris Hocking, Mike Greaney EDITOR Kevin Luk DESIGNERS Evie Hilliar, Milo Gluth BACKGROUND ASSISTANT Jasmyne Foster ANIMATORS Namira Primandari, Lucas Cappy LEGAL AND BUSINESS AFFAIRS Jenny Lalor AUDIO BY Dead On Sound SOUND DESIGNER Ryan Granger MUSIC Joel Taylor, Ben Keene ADDITIONAL MUSIC Ryan Granger AUDIO EDITOR Johnsen Cummings AUDIO PRELAY RECORDERS Talia Raso, Ryan Granger SCRIPT DEVELOPMENT Natesha Somasundaram, Declan Fay JUNIOR PRODUCER Alexandra Galloway PRODUCERS ATTACHMENT Anna Charisiou Presented by Screen Australia in association with VicScreen, a LateNite production. -~-~~-~~~-~~-~- Latest from Grouse House: "Have you no shame? [Lachie Ross] | How To Be Wellness" 🤍 -~-~~-~~~-~~-~-
This video is a explanation of how Wikipedia works, whether it is biased or not and whether or not you should be using it as a source for your projects. Patreon: 🤍 Subreddit: 🤍 Twitter: 🤍 E-Mail Address: viki1999mail🤍gmail.com The song in the outro was produced by 08 (who gave me no way to credit them), you can listen to the whole remix on my second channel: 🤍 Timestamps: 0:00 Intro 0:56 What is Wikipedia and how does it work 7:46 Examples of Bias 17:41 So will I keep using it? 20:20 Conclusion Sources: Tweet about me 🤍 How Wikipedia works 🤍 Wikipedia’s accuracy 🤍 Video summing up the structure of Wikipedia 🤍 Ideological bias on Wikipedia 🤍 Japanese Wikipedia bias 🤍 Crowd sourced examples of bias in Wikipedia 🤍 🤍 Columbus sending slaves back to Spain 🤍 Conservapedia on Wikipedia 🤍 Conservapedia general information 🤍 Conservapedia on Wikipedia 2 🤍 Conservapedia on Wikipedia 3 🤍 Criticisms of Wikipedia 🤍 My latest video 🤍 Transcript: Hello everybody. If you watched any of my recent videos and had a look at the description or the comment sections, you will have seen one thing. Wikipedia. And lots of angry people who say I shouldn’t use it at a source. It’s gotten so bad that I added an angry disclaimer to my last descriptions because I was frustrated with what I saw as unproductive feedback. Among that was this one tweet which got more likes and retweets than I am comfortable with. It seems some people have serious issues with my choice of sources. So, I am making this video to explain what Wikipedia is, how it works, why it can be a bad source, examples of bias and whether I will keep using it despite all that. And yes, just to prove I can, this video will not cite Wikipedia at all. That being said, let’s start with, what is Wikipedia? Wikipedia is a free online encyclopaedia run by the Wikipedia foundation who are a non-profit organisation. The information on the different pages is added and edited by users. Anyone can make a change. Which seems like it is ripe for misinformation, but if someone makes a change without a citation that change will be overruled. There are volunteer administrators who more or less sign off on the changes people propose. There are unchecked changes on small articles but those are rare. And if the citation is missing then it will say “citation needed”, and there will be a disclaimer telling you that the information may not be reliable. Personally, I once tried to write a Wikipedia article on the new religion I invented, long story. It was immediately flagged by a bot and deleted by an admin. These admins have rights others don’t have, for example they can ban users if they behave badly or make bad faith edits, and if it’s an anonymous user they will ban their IP address. The administrators can also make a page protected. If we look at the page of world war two we can see this little padlock here which tells us this page is protected, meaning without an account you can’t change anything about it. And an account needs to be established before you can make changes. As you can imagine this is used on loads of pages to protect them from vandalism.
Compare news coverage. Spot media bias. Avoid algorithms. Be well informed. Download the free Ground News app at 🤍 It's very common in the West, especially in the US, for people to assume that propaganda doesn't really exist in our society. Sure, those other countries brainwash their citizens, but not us! No, all our media is completely unbiased. Let's explore the idea of propaganda, and how exactly it functions in neoliberal capitalism. You're Not Immune To Propaganda – Second Thought SUBSCRIBE HERE: 🤍 New video every Friday! Citations And Further Reading: Neoliberal subjectification and control 🤍 🤍 🤍 🤍 🤍 🤍 🤍 Bernays’ propaganda 🤍voltairenet.org/IMG/pdf/Bernays_Propaganda_in_english_.pdf Britannica’s propaganda 🤍 More on propaganda 🤍 Iraq 🤍 🤍 🤍 🤍 🤍 🤍 Guatemala 🤍 t🤍 Macron 🤍 🤍 🤍 🤍 🤍 Follow and Support Second Thought! Twitter: 🤍 Patreon: 🤍 BuyMeACoffee: 🤍 CashApp: $JTChapman Watch More Second Thought: Latest Uploads: 🤍 Spaaaaaace!: 🤍 What If...: 🤍 Popular Videos: 🤍 About Second Thought: Second Thought is a channel devoted to education and analysis of current events from a Leftist perspective. Welcome! Business Email: secondthoughtchannel🤍gmail.com
Wikipedia, history, and historians - Jim Grossman in INT's ENLIGHTENMENT MINUTES. American Historical Association Executive Director Jim Grossman on Wikipedia for teaching, learning, and making history. For more on the art of writing good history, see the American Historical Review - especially the December 2013 roundtable on scale: 🤍 And watch for more! Subscribe to the Intelligent Channel today!
You could argue Wikipedia is a good example of the internet being a force for good. A free to use site, run largely by volunteers, which provides a service where anyone can educate themselves on various topics. Sure, like everything, it is subject to the biases of its volunteer force, but by and large Wikipedia has a good record on being pretty fair. There is a saying that 'reality has a left wing bias', and that seems to have been the thing that created Conservapedia. This Right-Wing clone of wikipedia claims to reject bias while promoting evolution, blatant conservative opinions and conspiracy theories. .00:00:00 - Conservatives want a safe space 00:03:00 - Conservapedia Origins 00:09:10 - The World View of Conservapedia 00:16:30 - Conservapedia thinks Joe Biden is a Maoist 00:21:40 - The Conspiracies of Conservapedia 00:29:00 - There is no hope for Conservatives My Patreon: 🤍 Follow me on Twitter: 🤍 My Instagram: 🤍 Second Channel: 🤍 My Podcast: 🤍 My Subreddit: 🤍 My Personal Reddit: 🤍 My Medium: 🤍 Alex (guy who did the graphics) YouTube channel: 🤍
Why there’s no such thing as “liberal media bias” - Unqualified Reservations - Mencius Moldbug (aka Curtis Yarvin) Why there’s no such thing as “liberal media bias” Unqualified Reservations Mencius Moldbug (aka Curtis Yarvin) June 7, 2007 🤍 Links: 🤍 🤍 🤍 🤍 🤍 🤍 🤍 🤍 🤍 🤍 🤍 🤍 🤍 Got ideas for narration on my channel? Let me know by dropping the details on this form: 🤍 🤍y/ You can support me on SubscribeStar: 🤍 Throw me a tip at DonationAlerts (with paypal!) 🤍 Or with BTC: bc1qswsnttlxumftk78r2qkx7ahn3f8ts3qhqkedmd
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) pressed Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg on whether or not there is a political bias at the social media giant.
The first 1,000 people to use this link will get a 1 month free trial of Skillshare: 🤍 Every minute of every day, the media and most Americans yell about how the Democrats are going "too far left." For the rest of the world, this is an absurd statement, but the average American believes it...why? In this episode, we're talking about the Democrats, how left-wing they really are, and why socialism has never really found a foothold in the United States. How Left Is The American Left...And Why Didn't Socialism Catch On Here? – Second Thought SUBSCRIBE HERE: 🤍 New video every Friday! Citations and Further Reading: Yugopnik’s video (on the red scare) 🤍 Wikipedia/Political Compass 🤍 🤍 🤍 🤍 🤍 Quick note about Bernie & social democracy 🤍 🤍 UK politics 🤍 🤍 🤍 🤍 🤍 EU Parliament 🤍 Eric Foner’s take 🤍 Why is there no socialist USA? 🤍 🤍 (before you read ^) 🤍 🤍 🤍 Follow and Support Second Thought! Twitter: 🤍 Patreon: 🤍 BuyMeACoffee: 🤍 CashApp: $JTChapman Watch More Second Thought: Latest Uploads: 🤍 Spaaaaaace!: 🤍 What If...: 🤍 Popular Videos: 🤍 About Second Thought: Second Thought is a channel devoted to education and analysis of current events from a Leftist perspective. Welcome! Business Email: secondthoughtchannel🤍gmail.com
What I really believe SUBSCRIBE: 🤍 FOLLOW ME: 🇨🇦Support me on Patreon! 🤍 🤖Join my Discord! 🤍 🇺🇸Follow me on Instagram! 🤍 🇨🇦Read my latest Washington Post columns: 🤍 🇨🇦Visit my Canada Website 🤍 HASHTAGS: #jjmccullough #conservative #politics
Tucker Carlson and Wikipedia co-founder discuss how the website has become more biased #FoxNews #Tucker Subscribe to Fox News! 🤍 Watch more Fox News Video: 🤍 Watch Fox News Channel Live: 🤍 FOX News Channel (FNC) is a 24-hour all-encompassing news service delivering breaking news as well as political and business news. The number one network in cable, FNC has been the most-watched television news channel for 18 consecutive years. According to a 2020 Brand Keys Consumer Loyalty Engagement Index report, FOX News is the top brand in the country for morning and evening news coverage. A 2019 Suffolk University poll named FOX News as the most trusted source for television news or commentary, while a 2019 Brand Keys Emotion Engagement Analysis survey found that FOX News was the most trusted cable news brand. A 2017 Gallup/Knight Foundation survey also found that among Americans who could name an objective news source, FOX News was the top-cited outlet. Owned by FOX Corporation, FNC is available in nearly 90 million homes and dominates the cable news landscape, routinely notching the top ten programs in the genre. Watch full episodes of your favorite shows The Five: 🤍 Special Report with Bret Baier: 🤍 Fox News Primetime: 🤍 Tucker Carlson Tonight: 🤍 Hannity: 🤍 The Ingraham Angle: 🤍 Fox News 🤍 Night: 🤍 Follow Fox News on Facebook: 🤍 Follow Fox News on Twitter: 🤍 Follow Fox News on Instagram: 🤍
UPDATE: Kurzgesagt's official response: 🤍 My response to Kurzgesagt: 🤍 Kurzgesagt is not just a popular science outreach channel. It's a major tool for propaganda of their billionaire sponsors. Support independent research and analysis by joining my Patreon page: 🤍 Kurzgesagt received estimated $7 million from billionaire funds. This would be more money than Kurzgesagt received from their supporters on Patreon (estimated $3.5 million) in the entire history of the channel. Sources [First half only; second part in the pinned comment]  🤍  🤍  🤍  🤍  🤍  🤍  🤍  🤍  🤍  🤍  🤍  🤍  🤍  🤍  🤍 [15a] 🤍 [15b] 🤍  🤍  🤍 [18a] 🤍 [18b] 🤍  🤍  🤍  🤍  🤍  🤍  🤍  🤍  🤍  🤍  🤍  🤍  🤍  🤍  🤍  🤍  🤍  🤍  🤍  🤍  🤍  🤍  🤍 Follow me: 🤍 🤍 The footage and images featured in the video were for critical analysis, commentary and parody, which are protected under the Fair Use laws of the United States Copyright act of 1976.
After much complaining by commenters, I thought it was time to address a major one. Today we're going to talk about bias in academia and scholarship in general, whether it is a problem, how it came to be, and why it matters. To offset my own opinions, Tristan from Step Back History is going to live chat with us, who happens to also be a PhD student - so we can both speak about the Ivory Tower. Keep in mind this is our opinions, though it is backed by the research you can check below. Check out Step Back History: 🤍 references: Gross, Neil. Why are Professors Liberal and Why do Conservatives Care. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2013. 🤍 Salas, Alexandra. “Academic Freedom Under Siege from Claims of Liberal Bias.” Education Digest 72, i4 (December 2006), 55-59. Yancey, George. “Recalibrating Academic Bias.” Academic Questions 25, i2 (June, 2012), 267-278. Zipp, John and Rudy Fenwick. “Is the Academy a Liberal Hegemony?” Public Opinion Quarterly 70, n3 (Fall 2006), 304-326. 🤍 SUBSCRIBE FOR MORE VIDEOS: 🤍 Support the channel through Patreon: 🤍 LET'S CONNECT: 🤍 🤍 Wiki: Liberal bias in academia refers to the perception that academia have liberal bias in the United States, Canada, Australia, United Kingdom and other Western countries, that college and university professors are disproportionately liberal compared to the general population. The extent and causes of this perceived bias have been the subject of intensive debate in both academic literature and the popular press. Hashtags: #AcademicBias #LiberalBias #Bias #Historians #Politics
Further Reading: "Media bias in the United States" - Wikipedia 🤍 "David Spade to Obama President Obama ... Thirstiest President Ever" - TMZ 🤍 "Jerry Lewis goes full nutter: Syrian refugees ‘are not part of the human condition’ " - Arturo Garcia 🤍 "Clint Eastwood" - Republican National Convention 🤍
Liberal vs. Conservative: A Neuroscientific Analysis with Gail Saltz New videos DAILY: 🤍 Join Big Think Edge for exclusive video lessons from top thinkers and doers: 🤍 What the difference in brain structure between liberals and conservatives? And where do our political convictions come from: rational deliberation, or biological determinism? GAIL SALTZ: Dr. Gail Saltz is a bestselling author of numerous books and the go-to expert on a variety of important psychological issues. She is Chair of the 92nd Street Y "7 Days of Genius Advisory Committee" and Consultant and Event Moderator for the Clinton Foundation's Health Matters Initiative. Dr. Saltz is an Associate Professor of Psychiatry at the NY Presbyterian Hospital Weill-Cornell School of medicine, a psychoanalyst with the New York Psychoanalytic Institute, and has a private practice in Manhattan. TRANSCRIPT: Gail Saltz: So I think what’s really fascinating is that there have been a number of recent studies looking at brain structural differences between liberals and conservatives. And what’s been found in several studies is that liberals tend to have a larger anterior cingulate gyrus. That is an area that is responsible for taking in new information and that impact of the new information on decision making or choices. Conservatives tended on the whole to have a larger right amygdala. Amygdala being a deeper brain structure that processes more emotional information - specifically fear based information. So it’s really responsible for the flight or fright response. And this isn’t everybody. It’s not black and white and of course then, you know, what about all of the people in the middle? But basically the study showed that if you just based it on brain structural size different you could predict who would be a conservative and who would be a liberal with frequency of 71.6 percent. 71.6 percent is a pretty high ability to predict who is a conservative and who is a liberal just from brain structure. When you look at what your parents were in terms of predicting what you might be in terms of conservative versus liberal, that enabled you to predict in studies at a rate of 69.5 percent. So very close. Not quite as good and why is that interesting? It’s because the brain is plastic. So the question as to whether you have a brain structure to start with that informs whether you will be a liberal or conservative or whether the formation of certain thoughts from your parents for example shapes your brain structure. Because the brain is plastic and ever changing, particularly in youth. So does thinking certain thoughts or predominantly let’s say utilizing your right amygdala versus your anterior cingulate gyrus inform the growth of those areas and therefore help you predict later who is liberal and who is conservative. So in terms of interpreting the meaning of different sized structures for a liberal versus a conservative I think you have to look at what that area is predominantly responsible for. So for instance for conservatives if you’re right amygdala is enlarged and that’s the fear processing area you would expect maybe choices or decisions or character and personality to be more informed by a response to a fearful situation. So for example conservatives in fact in personality studies do tend to rate higher in areas of stability, loyalty, not liking change, being more religiously involved in terms of decision making, having that rate higher for them in making certain choices. And if you look at liberals from a personality character standpoint you’re going to find stronger ratings in terms of liking change wanting to actually base decision making on new information, on science information. And so those differences are not surprising in light of these brain structural differences. Being a liberal or being a conservative really is not black and white. It’s really a bell shaped curve where, you know, someone who considers themselves conservative may be far less conservative so to speak than someone else who still calls themselves a conservative. And that bell shaped curve continues all the way through where in the middle there may be a large group that calls themselves independents. What we don’t know is whether that has to do with differences in brain structure and so would we see in independents, no one’s does that study to say oh, independents don’t show any differences in brain structure or any differences in say risk taking reaction. So we don’t know for sure what that means but I think it’s fair to say that even when we looked a... For the full transcript, check out 🤍
Put the power of quant in your portfolio with Composer today: 🤍 Free weekly essays written by Moon - 🤍 What is behind Reddit/Discord Mods 'distinct' look? There's 3 main reasons causing this and the reasons might surprise you. Ghost Gum's video - 🤍 Support the channel here (all money goes straight back into the channel): ► Become a Patron: 🤍 ► Follow my Twitter: 🤍 This video goes over the truth about reddit mods, redditors and discord mods, who abuse their power and turn reddit into trash, which is why reddit is bad and is filled with reddit degenerates. Famously this was seen with the reddit mod on fox news, the reddit mod for r/antiwork. #RedditMods #Moon
My talk at the 2018 London Conference on Intelligence in Skanderborg, Denmark Paper: Under preparation Slides: 🤍 Find me at Odysee (bitchute alternative): 🤍 Support me: 🤍 🤍
Why "Neither Left Nor Right" Just Means Right Wing | Bonapartism – Second Thought SUBSCRIBE HERE: 🤍 New video every Friday! Citations and Further Reading: Basic info 🤍 🤍 🤍 🤍 🤍 🤍 The controversial definition of democracy 🤍 Madison quote 🤍 Macron 🤍 🤍 Le Pen 🤍 🤍 The 18th Brumaire 🤍 🤍 🤍 Trump 🤍 Yang 🤍 French language sources 🤍 🤍 🤍 🤍 🤍 🤍 🤍 Follow and Support Second Thought! Twitter: 🤍 Patreon: 🤍 BuyMeACoffee: 🤍 CashApp: $JTChapman Watch More Second Thought: Latest Uploads: 🤍 Spaaaaaace!: 🤍 What If...: 🤍 Popular Videos: 🤍 About Second Thought: Second Thought is a channel devoted to education and analysis of current events from a Leftist perspective. Welcome! Business Email: secondthoughtchannel🤍gmail.com
It's no secret that GAMERS do not like supposed politics in their games, especially left wing politics. However, whether they like it or not some of the most successful games in history have contained both political messaging and left-wing themes. Metal Gear Solid, Watch Dogs, Fallout and others have all contained anti-capitalist and anti-American themes. Some Conservatives don't really accept this though. To justify their love for a game they simply ignore the obvious political messaging and even go as far to claim that obvious left wing games actually promote conservative values. Recently, I came across a post on a Conservative Wikipedia clone that had an extensive list of the 'Greatest Conservative Video Games' ever made - and I thought it would be fun to read through them. .00:00:00 - Conservatives don't understand Video Games 00:04:30 - What is Conservapedia ? 00:08:20 - The Greatest CONSERVATIVE Games of All Time 00:08:30 - Watch Dogs 00:11:15 - Metal Gear Solid 00:20:00 - LA Noire 00:22:40 - Call of Duty World at War 00:24:37 - Fallout 4 00:27:30 - Conservatives Can't Accept they like Left-Wing games My Patreon: 🤍 Follow me on Twitter: 🤍 My Instagram: 🤍 Second Channel: 🤍 My Podcast: 🤍 My Subreddit: 🤍 My Personal Reddit: 🤍 My Medium: 🤍 Alex (guy who did the graphics) YouTube channel: 🤍
Paper available here: 🤍 Find me at Odysee (Bitchute alternative): 🤍 Donate via Subscribestar 🤍 Or on Paypal (until they shut it down) 🤍 Or with Cryptos (can't be shut down) Bitcoin: 32Pvp5RqM9n5dzESkVAqSBbsBUNe59xLbW Ethereum: 0xe54C4d7D7661b78e46e8C7A3b88f4C5230fd5E28 Monero: 4GdoN7NCTi8a5gZug7PrwZNKjvHFmKeV11L6pNJPgj5QNEHsN6eeX3DaAQFwZ1ufD4LYCZKArktt113W7QjWvQ7CWBLwwBeatGpF3emEGm I am also on Twitter: 🤍 And my primary blog is at: 🤍
Guys, if you wanna learn how to make videos, i have officially opened up the Nas Academy! It's an ONLINE school where we teach you how to script, shoot ,and edit videos...LIVE! Nas Academy has very limited spots, so sign up now - That's 1 minute, see you tomorrow. 🤍y
Dave Rubin of The Rubin Report talks to Heather Mac Donald, Fellow at the Manhattan Institute and author of The Diversity Delusion. Heather gives her thoughts on what she believes is the myth of gender bias and widespread discrimination against women in the US. She uses examples of institutions without gatekeepers like Wikipedia, Scrabble, and Jeopardy to illustrate how disparities in gender or race are not proof of discrimination, but likely proof of different preferences between the genders. Is the drive for diversity undermining American culture? Is the extreme focus on race and gender diversity, harming society and making us more divided? Heather tackles these difficult subjects and more. Heather thinks that a better defense of capitalism, meritocracy and entrepreneurship must be made to save Western Civilization from the threat of identity politics. Heather makes the argument that the social justice arguments concerning systemic discrimination made by people like Michelle Alexander and Ta-Nehisi Coates can only be defeated by countering the myths concerning bias. Watch Dave Rubin’s full interview with Heather Mac Donald here: 🤍 Watch Dave Rubin’s previous interview with Heather Mac Donald here: 🤍 Is the state of US news driving you crazy? Does the coverage of political news rarely seem “fair and balanced”? Serious discussions on US politics is vital to having a healthy democracy. No matter what political party you belong to, we need to be able to hear a variety of political perspectives. Whether you majored in political science or just want to have a deeper understanding of the issues you’ll want to check out this playlist: 🤍 To make sure you never miss a single Rubin Report video, click here to subscribe: 🤍 Looking for smart and honest conversations about current events, political news and the culture war? Want to increase your critical thinking by listening to different perspectives on a variety of topics? If so, then you’re in the right place because on The Rubin Report Dave Rubin engages the ideas of some of society's most interesting thought leaders, authors, politicians and comedians. The Rubin Report is the largest talk show about free speech and big ideas on YouTube. Dave allows his guests to speak their minds and his audience to think for themselves. New videos every week. The Rubin Report is fan funded through monthly and one-time donations: 🤍 Dave Rubin's book, "Don't Burn This Book" is now available for pre-order: 🤍dontburnthisbook.com LISTEN to The Rubin Report podcast: 🤍rubinreport.com/podcast See Dave LIVE: 🤍 Sign up for our newsletter with the best of The Rubin Report delivered to your inbox once a month: 🤍 Official Rubin Report Merchandise: 🤍 All art on the set are original works by Caylin Rose Janet. Get a print here: 🤍 Heather Mac Donald Author Heather on Twitter: 🤍 Get the book: 🤍 Follow Dave on Twitter: 🤍 Follow The Rubin Report on Facebook: 🤍 Follow Dave on Facebook: 🤍 Follow Dave on Instagram: 🤍 About Dave Rubin: 🤍