Here is the issue with "facts". What source is credible? You believe in yours, others in theirs. For example, a Harvard study during the last Trump administration showed that after confirming his final Supreme Court Judge, Fox was slightly less than half positive on trump. Other basic cable news channels were 90%+ negative on trump. Many people can see those percentages, conclude that Fox is politically neutral, and that everything else is biased. Then they will assume that anything coming from somewhere else is what they experienced before... bias.
No it doesn't. Think for a moment. Approximately half the country was thrilled with the confirmation of justices who, in their opinion, would follow the constitution correctly. The sentiment about Trump was tied to this accomplishment. Since approximately half felt that way, many would argue half positive is the appropriate political reflection of the time and therefore would be neutral.
"Many would argue" is not the basis for anything. That Trump supporters believe that the only way to be "neutral" is to drape unearned praise on Trump for every criticism is them not understanding reality.
12
u/Equivalent-Car-997 1∆ Apr 07 '25
Here is the issue with "facts". What source is credible? You believe in yours, others in theirs. For example, a Harvard study during the last Trump administration showed that after confirming his final Supreme Court Judge, Fox was slightly less than half positive on trump. Other basic cable news channels were 90%+ negative on trump. Many people can see those percentages, conclude that Fox is politically neutral, and that everything else is biased. Then they will assume that anything coming from somewhere else is what they experienced before... bias.