What about Fox News? Are they not MSM to you?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Human Curation Sets Apple News Apart From Algorithm-Focused News Sources Like Google and Facebook
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Change your region to United States and you should see it. I think it will be easier in macOS since you don’t have to change store settings on it. It’s built into the OS.
Most of Apple News will skew to the left because all the curators are to the left and Apple is to the left. It’s not complicated.
Cue incoming #NPC comments re: Breitbart and Fox News in 3,2,1
If you really do this then you have no idea about what is happening in the world. With the exception of CNN and Buzzfeed, the NYT and WaPo are primary sources not aggregators. They write the articles that everyone else will reference or modify when writing their own version. I would include the WSJ as well.
You have a choice. You can either live in the real world or you can live in a fantasy parallel universe thinking that everything is a conspiracy. If you don’t want centrist/center-left politics then don’t read their political articles. All will be labeled “opinion.” Politics is just a fraction of news content.
Last edited:
Is anyone skeptical of someone having the power of showing you what you see in the news?
Because news editors for eons did this professionally before the world decided algorithms that feed them content that fits their own world view were better sources despite lacking verification or validation. And in being spoon fed stuff that suits your world view because algorithm detected the drivel published on the internet, it eliminates any chance of you questioning your own beliefs and instead coddling readers into placation, telling them their skewed perspective is valid. The internet equivalent of a gold star for effort. Take something seemingly apolitical—medicine and vaccines. The amount of misinformation because someone without a science or medical background published an article online without a science or medicine editor reviewing it leads to severe consequences. It’s clear there is a huge failure in the algorithm generated system and skeptics vocalizing stupidly skeptical opinions like this and then clutching their pearls when someone calls it out will feed into this system with ******** consequences than those we’ve already seen.
For another example, algorithm generated articles in India which are explicitly anti-Muslim in Hindu predominant villages spewing false news about beef consumption, leading to the very real consequence of Hindu mobs murdering innocent Muslim individuals. But sure, verified non algorithmic news is the problem.
[doublepost=1540481381][/doublepost]
This.
those who spout idiotic catchphrases like attacking the boogeyman MSM never learned the essential skill of critical thinking and nuanced thinking. And that is clearly a failure of the education system, or our inability to emphasize the right learning skills.
And don’t even get me started on the notion of false equivalency that then gets hurled back in any argument. Don’t try it, it lacks nuance and intelligence and should be ignored.
Just curious why - Apple News is a great integrated platform. It’s trying to provide the news in a presentable way that’s east to read and follow.
Google is an advertising company.
Yep. Also in my normal feed I have NEVER EVER stated I want to see anything related to hollywood, movie info, especially actors including social media stars and yet I get a lot of it. I have had to block at least a dozen sources and still get junk in my stream.
With my iPhone X it is way to easy to accidentally side swipe something into a full page ad. Lastly what is the deal with showing me an article from say Bloomberg, only to open it and I find I can only read a few lines then I see a big stop telling me I need a subscription....source blocked.
The negative of a human curation is that BIAS will creep in. Living in the midwest I am not sure I want someone living in New York that used to work for New Yorker magazine curating the news.
That’s interesting. You lump the NYT and WaPo in with CNN and Buzzfeed? No one should be getting their news from Buzzfeed or any cable news station, IMHO. But newspapers are different. I’ve seen some really “pro-Trump” pieces in the WSJ, but, considering it’s the WSJ, I’m hardly tempted to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
It’s a really interesting time now, with people now getting to choose what they think is a reputable news source. Absolutely everything used to be curated for us, and I think we were better off that way, crazy as that might sound.
People letting Alex Jones fill up their heads with information is terrifying. (A completely psycho “left wing” example is just a scary— because it’s not a partisan issue.)
I learned critical thinking and that is what keeps me away from the likes of CNN, Fox, MSNBC, NYT....etc. All you have to do is go any of those sources and see in 2-3 seconds the bias of each of those. Fox - Trump can do not wrong and 80-90% of the main page is just that. CNN and MSNBC - Trump is the root of all evil with 80-90% of their main page showing that. Also in all of those places 70% opinion pieces and 30% (or less) actual news. Also hype/link bait drives revenue for those MSM sources so everything posted on all of those sites, especially the opinion pieces is suspect IMHO.
So then do tell, what are fair and balanced examples you can provide? With verified, proper writing reviewed by fact checkers and editors as well as a public interest editor who can sure something will not generate undue harm to a group in society? Happy to broaden my reading pool if there are reasonable resources.
I almost forgot what I meant to write here.
Algorithms and AI can do lots of things well but they will never be human. They are not capable of differentiating emotions. They cannot tell sarcasm from sincerity. Fake from real. Biased from unbiased.
They are perfectly capable of sorting through music and art where there can never be a mistake. If you listen to classic rock, it will be very easy for an algorithm to quickly target notable 60s-80s rock songs through metadata and traffic.
Algorithms and AI can do lots of things well but they will never be human. They are not capable of differentiating emotions. They cannot tell sarcasm from sincerity. Fake from real. Biased from unbiased.
They are perfectly capable of sorting through music and art where there can never be a mistake. If you listen to classic rock, it will be very easy for an algorithm to quickly target notable 60s-80s rock songs through metadata and traffic.
Human curators are good if they know what you want. But they don't. They know what they want.
It's why human curators (unless they have experience in behavioral analysis and can look at things neutral) will not be as good as an algorithmic approach. Their biases play into the curation too much.
It's why human curators (unless they have experience in behavioral analysis and can look at things neutral) will not be as good as an algorithmic approach. Their biases play into the curation too much.
So I have to read what Apple employees deem good content. No thanks. I like Apple products, not their political preference.
So then you’re just looking at things through your own filter that tells you what you want to hear. Unless you’re out there doing your own reporting you’re always getting news through someone else’s filter.
Like Apple News? Seems trustworthy to me. At least more that just reading Facebook and and watching Youtube like some folks do.
What is your source that all off the curators have a left of center bias?
Nah.. the same/ Apple just does a better job hiding it.
[doublepost=1540482604][/doublepost]
I don’t follow any news apps.
I also would like to know what you read and watch. Sure, some foreign state organizations can be a source of more objective information as long as the story does not involve that state.
i.e. Al Jazeera except for stories involving Qatar
RT except for stories involving Russia and/or Russian/American relations/foreign policy.
Haaretz except for stories about the Israeli/Palestinian issue and so on.
(Sorry. Haaretz is not state media but I don’t believe Israel has state news and it made for an easy example).
Wish they switch back to old layout for landscape view on iPad.
That side bar after updating is wasting space.
Already sent request to Apple,
That side bar after updating is wasting space.
Already sent request to Apple,
I can actually open it if I just show hidden files in the App folder. Top news is available along with specific news sources, but curated daily news is locked out.
But it goes without saying it should of been localized to Canada a long time ago.
Apple has always been very liberal, so one might assume they are left.