The idea that "unbiased" reporting exists is a modern myth. There is bias in simply deciding the topic to report on.
The modern idea that "unbiased" is somehow a virtue just leads to the CNN phenomenon where every story has to have two sides regardless of what the situation actually is.
One of the purposes of journalism is to make the decisions about what is "news" and what is junk. Obviously these criteria are going to depend on a lot of personal interpretation, so the key to good reporting is to know and understand how the reporter judges a story - their bias - so their reporting can be properly weighted.
In this sense, techdirt is quite open an obvious with their bias, and is fairly consistent in style, which is something I wish I saw a lot more at "news" websites.
(how you interpret that bias is another matter entirely)
As for their content, while I agree techdirt can be one sided at times, I have never seen any serious lies, either direct or by omission. Maybe I've just missed them?
Speaking of which, I don't see how reposting a quote that was included in the techdirt article is supposed to be evidence of them being "one sided" or "not even trying to actually represent the truth".
The idea that "unbiased" reporting exists is a modern myth. There is bias in simply deciding the topic to report on.
The modern idea that "unbiased" is somehow a virtue just leads to the CNN phenomenon where every story has to have two sides regardless of what the situation actually is.
One of the purposes of journalism is to make the decisions about what is "news" and what is junk. Obviously these criteria are going to depend on a lot of personal interpretation, so the key to good reporting is to know and understand how the reporter judges a story - their bias - so their reporting can be properly weighted.
In this sense, techdirt is quite open an obvious with their bias, and is fairly consistent in style, which is something I wish I saw a lot more at "news" websites.
(how you interpret that bias is another matter entirely)
As for their content, while I agree techdirt can be one sided at times, I have never seen any serious lies, either direct or by omission. Maybe I've just missed them?
Speaking of which, I don't see how reposting a quote that was included in the techdirt article is supposed to be evidence of them being "one sided" or "not even trying to actually represent the truth".