Maybe, just maybe, it's because most people in the media are Democrats, and therefore inherently self-biased in their concerns and worldviews, and they have a belief that prevents any critical self-examination easily summed up by the Stephen Colbert line that: "reality has a liberal bias."
You can't argue with someone who thinks their beliefs are merely "reality." At least the other side recognizes it as religion, etc.
More accurately, the quote is "Reality has a well known liberal bias," and was given in the persona of a character Colbert played on an Comedy Central show and can be seen with a certain irony.
I think this reinforces my argument that liberals view it as indisputable that there is no bias in their favor in media and all their opinions are "merely reality."
well I think it's important to point out context and to be accurate with regard to the actual quote. imprecision with words leads to misinterpretation.
I'm not clear what your larger point is though or why you're singling out my comment with your rebuttal.
> there is a huge difference between a belief and a fact.
What if a fact is disputed? Do you not have to choose which fact to believe?
Gestalting between two disputed facts is the basis for scientific revolutions.
Ptolemaic astronomers certainly had a belief that epicycles were "fact" and made every non-scientific attempt to destroy heliocentrism. Only when enough people didn't _believe_ in that "fact" did we evolve to better understanding.
You can say "these were not facts and were just flawed observations", but you'll ignore that Ptolemaics _said_ these ideas were facts and had strong evidence and a belief that it really was.
This model can be applied over and over again to many domains. This isn't my idea, rather it comes from the seminal work "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" by TS Kuhn.
So, no, there is not a bold line between belief and fact. We choose what facts to believe.
I cited a major academic work to back up my position and gave a real world example to demonstrate the concept. What about Khun is crazy? You should attempt to engage in the topic and avoid ad hominem attacks. Or are you of the opinion that “we don’t believe in facts”?
You can't argue with someone who thinks their beliefs are merely "reality." At least the other side recognizes it as religion, etc.