Let's Try Losing Our Balance

What I wrote about false balance in the American corporate news media:

“If liberals said water was composed of two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom, while conservatives claimed that water was composed of a single hydrogen atom and two oxygen atoms, the corporate news media would dutifully report their ‘dispute.’ That's how a blind journalistic neutrality permits falsehood to gain dangerous and undeserved ground.”

Here’s what they replied:

Bev Koopman said, “So, if both ‘perspectives’ are presented as equally valid, then the public would be led to believe that there is the very real possibility that the water molecule really was composed of 1.5 hydrogen atoms and 1.5 oxygen atoms, since that conclusion lies somewhere between the two conjectures. Yep, that's journalism in America today.”

Bilmarde said, “And if the liberal told a similar untruth down the line the media would respond with, ‘see, they both lie,’ never mind the fact that the Republicans have uttered 20 unchallenged untruths.”

Jokelly said, “And scientists would be called political hacks with a left-wing agenda who hate America and seek to punish success...”

Roger LeMonde replied, “Nice try, but you are busted. That air of reason you cultivate has a strong bias.” To sum up, the balance of a news article should reflect the weight of the valid evidence, not merely the number of viewpoints or the shrillness of the voices involved. And here's an object lesson in false balance bullshit.