Skip Navigation

Why are people downvoting the MediaBiasFactChecker bot?

I know MediaBiasFactCheck is not a be-all-end-all to truth/bias in media, but I find it to be a useful resource.

It makes sense to downvote it in posts that have great discussion -- let the content rise up so people can have discussions with humans, sure.

But sometimes I see it getting downvoted when it's the only comment there. Which does nothing, unless a reader has rules that automatically hide downvoted comments (but a reader would be able to expand the comment anyways...so really no difference).

What's the point of downvoting? My only guess is that there's people who are salty about something it said about some source they like. Yet I don't see anyone providing an alternative to MediaBiasFactCheck...

346

You're viewing a single thread.

346 comments
  • Comment sections are for comments.

    This is the fediverse. I feel like these kinds of bots should be emitting something other than a comment, just a generic "metadata" might be good. Then work to get that adopted by the various platforms.

    Because comment sections should be a place for people.

    • to be fair, metadata would be hard to federate. here at mbin we have attached media with real alt text separate from the post body and lemmy still doesn't have that

      • FWIW, there's a reason I prefer mbin instances.

        I feel like some amount of variation among fediverse software is exactly how we should try to suss all this out.

        I just vote to keep comment sections for humans.

        (I realize I can block and I do and I will, still want to shout my opinion into the storm for a second.)

You've viewed 346 comments.