Bias and Factuality Are Not the Same Thing -DRAFT
[This is an experiment in thought. I am not sure if I agree with every idea or argument. But I am not sure that I disagree with any either. Some words have more flexible meanings and uses, while other words have denotations that are less flexible.]
Everyone and every media is always biased.
Bias is as natural as gravity.
Neutrality is a ‘bias’ toward being evenly divided between two polarities. By holding a middle ground, they are ‘biased’ toward being ‘equal’ — for whatever motivation they have for doing/being so. Someone could argue that being neutral is to be in the absence of bias, but that is a viewpoint more than a statement of reality. A liberal person can look at something with a conservative bias. Bias is like personality in that it is an ‘assumed’ way of being/doing/seeing. Mean-spirited and angry people can put on a friendly, kind, and happy face and vice versa.
Being biased is not the same as being nonfactual. If I say that 3 is 7, that is not factual. A very sneaky person might assume that they, themselves, mean that these number are the ‘same’ because they are both numbers, so they are similar or even this ‘same.’
The biggest trick of bias is selectivity. You can either select only things that cast a good light on a topic or only ‘facts’ that cast a bad light on it. It can also be the ‘sneakiest’ way to be biased. It can seem like not being biased at all, for the person could be only being using actual facts. This mere collection of facts can make this person seem very honest and truthful.
One of the greatest examples of this can be how people can be very tender with their family and cruel to those who are not members of their family. Ironically, many humans are the opposite — cruel to their family and nice to ‘outsiders.’
Media publications both can widely vary in their bias (right/conservative and left/liberal) and/or in favor or against certain topics or positions AND in their factuality.
When it comes to factuality, do they use actual known and verifiable facts and how selective are they in picking them?
Some of the biggest lessons that we are learning in modern times are: 1) are we looking FOR factual information that illuminates our understanding(s); 2) are we looking for information that both confirms and contradicts our preexisting views; and 3) are we selecting only the information that helps us to promote our preexisting views (confirmation-bias) and ignoring the information that contravenes our vies?
When people directly acknowledge their biases, they are at least aware of the difference between their bias/views and raw factual reality.
The old lesson between opinions and facts has become less of direct concern of society. Today, we assume that most people know the difference between these, and that they know the nuanced intermixing of opinion/viewpoint and factuality in our lives.
Bias is a big part of being. Being aware of it all times in all things is part of being ‘advanced.’ Knowing about bias doesn’t guarantee that we will use it honestly, that is a choice of the will.
Facts like rocks can be used to build walls to separate humans, to protect people in homes, or to throw at and harm others. The existence of a fact many be neutral, but is use will probably not be.
All communication is manipulative …seeking to persuade.
To know bias and facts is basic humanity, but to wisely use facts of all kinds to inform and shape bias for the betterment of the humanity and the human condition is divine. Of course, ideology will grow in our minds as we develop preferential ways of seeing.