I focus on Yahoo News because I think it is a hilariously bad news aggregate website. As Yahoo scales down their own production due to economic necessity, they are featuring more and more articles that they themselves didn't author. They rarely feature an article that they employed someone to write and nearly every article that they feature is written by websites that are well over the line to the left of the political spectrum.
src
Rarely will you find even a single article that isn't an op-ed on Yahoo News and if there is one thing that you can always count on being on their one and only page, it is going to be lots of hit-pieces on Trump. This began in 2015 and it became the basic staple of Yahoo's entire existence. They are a well for people who hate Trump to get their daily dose of hatred, basically topping up the tank. The fact that all of it is just some guy's opinion as they pick and choose which data to show the reader, doesn't seem to matter a great deal to the users and I find it very unlikely that it ever will.
src
Take this HuffPo article for example: "Freaks out" is such a childish thing to say and it would be very subjective to determine if someone was actually doing that. The right is guilty of this as well as conservative news outlets constantly refer to leftist statements as being "unhinged, frantic, and backpedaling."
So if you want to fill up someone's TDS tank, all you need to do is find an unflattering picture of whoever you are talking about, focus on a couple of Tweets that the person in question may or may not have even written, and then sit back and wait for the outrage. Most of the people aren't even going to read the article anyway, they just head straight for the comment section so they can talk to like minded people in the echo chamber.
src
Then we have one of the articles about Biden that is written by a similarly trash news outlet called Insider who only ever has one side of the story. Notice how the wording and picture used are ever-so-slightly different as far as first impressions are concerned? They find a dignified looking picture of Biden and then go on to do an op-ed about student loan forgiveness and focus very heavily on the word Harvard. People presume that when they see that word that the person in question must be very smart even though a ton of people who attended Harvard got in there and graduated from there almost exclusively because of family connections and financial resources. I once worked with a guy that had an Ivy League education and he was one of the dumbest people I have ever met but they kept him around because of his connections and credentials.
Susan Dynarski is the economist in question in this article and it is important to note that she has worked extensively to expand FAFSA (college financial aid) programs on the national level. Since this "forgiveness" has the potential to actually INCREASE the amount of people taking out superfluous loans and thereby make lenders even more money, can't you imagine that she might be a teensy bit compromised as far as this issue is concerned?
I suppose it doesn't really matter to me if she is or not, my focus in on how Yahoo presents their stories.
src
Here we go again but this time with AP, which has been moving further and further left since 2015, just like a lot of media that was at one point considered to be neutral.
Notice how they choose a picture that is flattering of Biden - which probably isn't so easy to accomplish these days - and then present a very small snippet of what was actually said. I didn't watch the speech and I don't have to in order to know exactly what was said. I would imagine it was a script that Joe managed to turn into word salad even though it was read from a teleprompter.
The bottom line is that Yahoo News is so biased these days that I check in there just to laugh a bit at how obvious their bias is. It becomes more and more funny as time goes by because Yahoo themselves don't even have a great deal to do with the process anymore. They rely on long-standing left-leaning outlets like HuffPo and Insider to do the dirty work for them and as anyone who follows the legacy media at all know, these two outlets in particular are never going to present the entire story to their readers.
They have an objective and that objective is to program you, not inform you. I hope that someday soon people are able to put their political views to the side for just long enough to realize that virtually every story, right or left-oriented, is a string of clever lies or half-truths designed to make you feel how they want you to feel.
I'd rather be uninformed than misinformed as the saying goes and for anyone out there that still reads this stuff, I think maybe you should take a week off from your news site of choice and see how much better you feel a week later.
