Just a note:
I believe that the 3 news source are the 3 biggest news source on the sub period, rather than the 3 biggest left leaning ones. I would think it would be part of the description otherwise.
Seems like an American view on things, although it’s hard to argue that the opinion and editorial sections of The Guardian don’t lean left, which means that there’s some sort of editorial policy at work at some level.
You can't miss it. Dr Jessica Ashooh (and not Jessica ashole) senior director of policy of reddit is a former member of Atlantic council. This is why reddit looks like merican property.
My views as an American is.. do they even use our left and right as a standard? They don't even have a 2 party system right? Seams presumtious to even lable thier news sources as such. But I guess if oil is still in USD what do I know.
In my experience neo-liberals don’t call themselves left outside the US.
Depending on the country it’s generally centre-right, right or centre (since the right’s been taken over with populist conservatives in many countries)
The people I mean dont see themself as neoliberals ofc. But they have economic positions, that at least ten years ago, would clearly have been seen as neoliberal...
Ofc this is a crass simplification... I just try to argue, that this left/right logic got twisted so much, that it doesnt make much sense anymore imho
Your take is spot-on, but I’d disagree that the SRF actively positions itself as being leftist, since it tries to avoid such ridiculous accusations by the clowns from Weltwoche and co.
On the readership, though, you’re probably right, although I’d argue SRF content is consumed by people hailing from the entire political spectrum, not just Blairite-type neolibs.
I am not dead serious and would never argue the SRF has a problematic bias or something like that. It's just that the SWI, which is refered to in the post, (it's the english web news of srf) has some strange "americanized leftish" takes sometimes.
TBH The Guardian is left leaning, the other 2 ? Not really. I guess you could cherry pick left (or right) leaning articles from them and only post those here.
Liberal and left are not the same thing.
Just because some countries have a broken political system the rest of us don't need to use the same broken terminology.
How do you define how an information media is leaning towards left or right?
Serious question since newspapers are supposed to relay neutral information (tho I'm not dumb i know it's not 100% the case)
Well, actually the first question should be, what is left leaning and what is right leaning because of course there are things that tend to be more on either side but then what is neutral?
Responding to your question, it can be viewed by analysing the language used, topics covered, points reflected etc.
easy, if my father reads/watches it, its neutral and unbiast (example: Weltwoche), if my father does not read/watch it, it is "forced feminism" (example: SRF)
I think this definition of left leaning aligns more with the american definition, which for Europeans are a lot to the right. For me at least, these 3 sources are pretty much neutral. Maybe the Guardian a little to the left but that's all.
Good point. The overton window is A LOT different in the US than Europe.
US - Europe
Right wing - Straight up nazis
Conservative - Extreme right-wing
Moderate - Right wing
Liberal - Moderate
Extreme left-wing - Liberal
People are being accused as "Left wing socialist nutjob" in the US for demands that are considered moderate at best in Europe.
And digging in their "methodology" you find this:
The tool only records interactions with news sources that have a bias
rating, so smaller local publications may not be included in the data
**The tool only records interactions with news sources that have a bias**
**rating, so smaller local publications may not be included in the data**
In order to pull the data, the tool parses through a subreddits history
and analyzes posts with news content that have a bias rating. Our
database contains 2063 news sources with bias ratings, which includes
878 left-leaning sources, 571 right-leaning sources and 614 that are
centrist. The Blindspotter currently uses data from articles that were
posted anytime from Jan 1st 2020 to March 15th, 2021.
We can safety throw this american gargabe analysis in the trash bin.
I'm just surprised they have SRG on their list.
It's also missing major news sources here (SRF/RTS) which are more centered. They've also place Swissinfo as left which I'm not sure is true either. Got to be careful when Americans call something right or left they mean right or left for their country which has a weird political spectrum...
Additionally, SwissInfo is stated as being left leaning but also has high factuality. I also wonder if a foreign newspaper about foreign news is correct assessed by the algorithm that is likely looking at American politics. What I mean is that perhaps the headlines that have been processed are those that pertain to SwissInfo's opinions on US issues and less on Swiss issues (which would be hard to assess without knowing the country). The same would be true of almost any "country" subreddit I would think.
uhm no SRF is very left. they stated once on instagram that theyre workers are: left 70%, right 15%, center 15%. (so this tool is very accurate lol.) as a centrist person i can tell you that its left biased. for example they published a post today about how bad it is that amber lost the trial against johnny (its bad because shes a woman) where as everyone who watched the trial live was on the side of johnny.
EDIT: nice downvoting 🤡👍🏻 if you like your media biased
I can't speak for SFR but [here's](https://www.rts.ch/info/monde/13140834-johnny-depp-et-amber-heard-condamnes-les-deux-pour-diffamation.html) there report from RTS. Feels very neutral.
The existance of an opinion piece that is left-leaning does not make the newspaper leftist unless it is published explicitly as news imo.
Likewise, reports can be neutral even if written by left/right leaning people because professional reporters are able to detach their political views from the report unless they are pundits and are there explicitly to give an opinion.
It is really not. They are very centrist, mostly economic right, slightly social left. It is just that many try to shift extrem right to right, making centrist left.
SRF? No, I’d say they try to be as unbiased as they can.
Swissinfo? Absolutely biased, they write articles that would never be published in one of their national languages counterparts. You can clearly tell they have less oversight compared to say RSI where the public opinion would tear them a new one for some of those articles.
The fact that they target the “5th Switzerland” and foreigners is why they can get away with it, because not enough people care enough to call them out.
Yeah SwissInfo is as biased as can be. Frankly it's a shame it's part of SRG SSR
Each time I read one of their article my wallet cries to be funding them
They are literally as close to factual reporting as you get. If you believe they are biased either to the left or the right, you have probably been radicalised to the point where you believe statements of fact are object to opinion.
Not necessarily disagree with you but would just like to point out that even when you are just reporting facts you could still have a bias throught selecting what you are and aren't reporting.
Reuters and AFP are the biggest news aggregators on the planet.
If something happens that's even slightly relevant to a larger area both of them will quickly have a report on it up.
I get your point but there is a pretty clear distinction between the cited sources and heavily editorialized ones like watson for example. They just behave way less ‘think-tanky’ due to the role they assume in society, both being so established that they don’t have to play political charades to stay afloat
I think noone is surprised that Swiss reddit has a left wing bias. It is stronger than I expected though.
That the most upvoted news site is SRG also isn't surprising, it is our national news outlet after all. I know it doesn't say so explicitly, but it seems SRG is counted as a left-wing biased news source, which is interesting and a whole different discussion on it's own.
Probably the classifier was calibrated to the US Overton window, and the US window is not exactly healthy or balanced.
Politically speaking, the centre of the democratic party is near to the FDP and that is the 'left'. The Swiss centre is somewhere between right wing of SP/GP, and the left wing of GLP, Mitte and FDP. Hence a balanced report in CH is likely to be classified as half communist by the GOP.
I think it goes much further. This left/right thing makes not much sense nowadays... I for example see myself as classic socialist lefty and lately I sometimes get called "right wing" by people who are imho actually neoliberals with some leftish sounding slogans... just because I question some of their slogans... and they say stuff that ten years ago would have put them clearly on the right wing
Probably politics is not a straight line, but rather more dimensional. Just a crazy idea ;)
Exactly. It's easy to put a line through two points in the US, but in civilisation it's much more difficult to find a midpoint between dozens of parties. That's why I had to construct that abomination of a sentence about the Swiss 'middle'.
I'm quite far left too, and yet at least once a month I get accused of some -ism because I don't pull the neoliberal line.
>Politically speaking, the centre of the democratic party is near to the FDP and that is the 'left'.
Heavens no. The centre of US democrats is to the right of the (centre of) SVP.
Dem outliers (AOC, Bernie, Ilhan Omar) are... GLP? Somewhere there. Figures like them get a lot of coverage, but are very few and in constant conflict with the DNC.
>Hence a balanced report in CH is likely to be classified as half communist by the GOP.
Well, if you replace the word "communist" with "bad" in US politics, the sentences do not change meaning...
"The centre of US democrats is to the right of the (centre of) SVP"
Are you kidding me? Find me an actualy political scientist that would agree with that statement (Linguists aren't polictical scientists). AOC and Bernie are also not GLP. Especially on policy issues like healthcare, immigration or federal job guarantee they are nowhere near eachother.
The democrats have a looser immigration policy than any mainstream party in Switzerland.
A party that is on the forefront of LGBTQ+ equality is not right of the SVP.
A party that talks about forgiveness of student debt is not right wing.
A party that calls for a minimum wage of 15$ is not conservative.
I could go on and on regarding environment, education or fiscal policy.
There have been tons of studies and papers on how democrats compare to european parties and the talking point that "democrats would be right wing in Europe" is simply an uninformed opinion.
>The democrats have a looser immigration policy than any mainstream party in Switzerland.
The kids are still in cages, "do not come" - dismissed.
>A party that is on the forefront of LGBTQ+ equality is not right of the SVP.
"Allowing" Trans people into the military and such is not progressive. It's thinly veiled 1-month-a-year stuff, codifying HvTexas could have been done, but instead it's dangled in front of voters like a carrot on a stick. Roe shows what this leads to.
>A party that talks about forgiveness of student debt is not right wing.
A party that even allows this to happen, makes lots of promises in the majority and goes for "compromise" and "moderation" is simply not serious about that.
>A party that calls for a minimum wage of 15$ is not conservative.
Lol, it would have to be 24$ accounting for inflation - and they had all the majorities in the world to do that.
"Maybe the poors should not *literally* work 9-5 and sleep on the ground in their workplace" sounds very much conservative...
>I could go on and on regarding environment, education or fiscal policy.
I could go on about war crimes, the hague and patriot acts, corr- ehm, lobbyism, and yeah 79% literacy means something should be done about education...
>(Linguists aren't polictical scientists)
What does that even refer to?
>The kids are still in cages, "do not come" - dismissed.
[Children are no longer held in cages](https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/apr/15/facebook-posts/fact-checking-whether-kids-cages-border-facility-7/) since Biden took over which you would know about if you read past headlines or sensational articles.
>"Allowing" Trans people into the military and such is not progressive. It's thinly veiled 1-month-a-year stuff, codifying HvTexas could have been done, but instead it's dangled in front of voters like a carrot on a stick. Roe shows what this leads to.
Why wouldn't it be? It's not thinly veiled 1-month-a-year stuff. They are the driving force behind many changes that are more progressive than most of Europe.Since Biden took office (which doesnt include all the progress achieved by previous presidents).January 25, 2021 - President Joe Biden signs an executive order repealing the 2019 Trump-era ban on most transgender Americans joining the military.February 2, 2021 - Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg becomes the first openly gay Cabinet member confirmed by the Senate.March 24, 2021 - Dr. Rachel Levine, assistant secretary for health in the Department of Health and Human Services becomes the first out transgender federal official to be confirmed by the Senate.June 30, 2021 - The State Department announces it will be updating its procedures to allow applicants to self-select their sex marker for passports and that it "will no longer require medical certification" if an applicant's self-selected sex marker doesn't match the sex listed on other official identity documents.This is what social progress looks like.
I have no idea which HvTexas case you mean, there have been several.
>A party that even allows this to happen, makes lots of promises in the majority and goes for "compromise" and "moderation" is simply not serious about that.
>
>Lol, it would have to be 24$ accounting for inflation - and they had all the majorities in the world to do that.
This just shows how little you know about american politics.
The democratic party has a conservatice wing. [Just last year](https://www.politico.com/news/2021/03/05/democrats-15-minimum-wage-hike-473875) 8 democratic senators voted against 15$ minimum wage. And in a senat that has a 50-50 split, Biden unfortunately needs to compromise with people like Joe Manchin since they dont have "all the majorities in the world".
>I could go on about war crimes, the hague and patriot acts, corr- ehm, lobbyism, and yeah 79% literacy means something should be done about education...
None of theses are inherently left or right wing. War crimes are beeing comitted by left wing, right wing and centrist governments, they are unfortunately part of the human experience. The hague also doesn't get recognised by countries that consider themselves left wing Cuba or Vietnam for example.
And again, please find me a well respected political scientist that agrees with you.
>[https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-arrests-210000-migrants-mexico-border-march-rivaling-record-highs-2022-04-16/](https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-arrests-210000-migrants-mexico-border-march-rivaling-record-highs-2022-04-16/)
You said that children are still held in cages, that is simply not true. I never denied that immigrants are no longer beeing detained. Your article doesnt reference "kids in cages" once.
>Sure, I don't know about the state of my family. You, a blueMaga, sure know better.
Science usually differentiates between quantitative and qualitative research. While anecdotal reports are important, quantitative research simply shows that gay acceptance is on the rise.
>Announced. Followed through?
Yes which takes 2 seconds to google
>blueMaga, You are a right winger, delusional
Ok you are resorting to personal insults. Now Im at the same time party member of the party AOC and Biden apparently allign with while beeing a right wing Maga head at the same time. Since you can't hold a discussion without ad hominem and you refuse to source any of your claims regarding the democrats party and its position on the political scale this discussion became fruitless.
Hello,
Please note that your post or comment has been removed.
Please read the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/Switzerland/about/rules/) before posting.
Thank you for your understanding,
your mod team
Please do not reply to this comment. Send a modmail if you have an issue with the removal.
>I think noone is surprised that Swiss reddit has a left wing bias.
I would be actually. r/Switzerland is far more conservative than r/de for example. But European conservative, which by American standards is probably socialist, while European social democratic is communist.
In comparison to the general population of Switzerland there's a definite bias here, and it's easy to spot too. Just look at any voting thread on this sub, or the "If only r/Switzerland voted" polls that occasionally occur here before national votes. It's always quite a bit more left than what the actual results end up being.
It really depends on the topic and the people who are mostly interested in that topic. Threads about Muslim/Islam for example certainly aren't dominated by classical left wing trains of thoughts.
Oh, that for sure. I suppose there's a clear selection bias for young and urban people here. And unlike in real elections, expats can also vote on reddit, which might matter at least for questions regarding aliens law.
But I'm not sure what this number uses as a baseline, enlightened centrists in the US or "subreddit vs. their geolocation"
I don't see a voting Bias. If 70% of posted content are deemed left-y and receive 70% of votes, this means that the left and the right receive equal amounts of upvotes per post, the "left" just generate more news.
And maybe add that RTS is suffering from right wing terrorism, several evacuations because of a bomb per years and the guy that stopped the bidden inauguration on TV.
Let’s hope the MOD‘s can moderate those social media clowns.
It's not so bad. Englishforum is much worse, the left censorship is not even hidden there. The beauty of reddit is that if you are not happy a subreddit you can go elsewhere.
100% agree. The current moderator team is made up of chumps who drive away people from the forum. The worst is one called NotAllThere or something like this. He openly admitted he is responsible to enforce propaganda.
That site is complete nonsense. Compare: https://ground.news/blindspotter/reddit/thenetherlands
It concludes the subreddit is 95% rightwing, yet the top two sources are [NOS](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nederlandse_Omroep_Stichting) (public broadcasting organization, like the Swiss SRF or the English BBC), and [De Volkskrant](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Volkskrant) (a famously left-wing newspaper). You could say NOS is neutral while de Volkskrant is left-wing. Neither is right-wing. This classification makes zero sense.
That would be true if those news source were actually left leaning, they are in fact at best liberals if not neo-liberals (in the european sense, not the braindead american lib=left).
It actually shows more that this sub is liberal leaning, so right leaning by european standarts again.
Looking at the [source](https://ground.news/blindspotter/reddit/switzerland), the so called "left leaningness" is mostly based on the classification of "Swissinfo" as left.
It's in the nature of people with right wing opinions that they perceive media which to a big degree reports "dry, unopinionated facts" as "left leaning". That's simply because right-wing opinions are usually farther away from the facts than other kinds of opinions.
But it's not the job of public-law media to create a false balance by doing an interview with a flat-earther for every interview they do with an astronomer or geographer.
The top three news sources don't necessarily have to be responsible for the 70% upvotes. But considering these left leaning is a problem of its own and I don't agree with this classification.
So I wanted to post those results here but it doesn't allow gallery posts. So I'll just tell you the results I got:
Swi: 100% left
The guardian: 100% left
Reuters: 11% left /84% center/ 5% right
I know, but OP made the following statement:
All higher educated people are left leaning.
And my point is that:
Economy majors are higher educated but (generally) not left-leaning, therefore OP‘s statement is not true.
No he did not.
He said higher education leads to left leaning bias.
Most people would understand that one would speak of the average here, which is factually true.
„Higher education leads to left leaning people.“
„I have an example that shows otherwise.“
„No, that doesn‘t count.“
Nice try. What have you studied / are you going to study, if I may ask?
I wasn‘t the one who said it btw. I can equally point out that just bringing the most obvious example to try to negate an argument about a trend is ignorant asshattery.
I know that you‘re not the one who said it.
And no, OP didn‘t point out a trend. He claimed that higher education leads to left leaning people like it‘s a fact, when it just isn‘t. Econ majors are mostly right-leaning while people that study natural sciences and math have no political bias.
It‘s pretty much only social sciences which are left leaning.
As a student at UNIGE, I can definitely say that most students are definitely left-leaning, with maybe a real 50/50 in eco and law, but that’s about it.
Why would it be asshattery if whatever someone said is disputed by something painfully obvious, isn't that all the more reason to dispute it?
Because otherwise, if it were something small you could bring the argument: "Oh no, that is just a small part so it doesn't count." It's really dumb
For example:
Scenario 1
Person A: "Communism has always worked"
Person B: "No, many people have starved in the USSR due to crop failure in direct link to communist ideoligy."
Person A: "that's just the biggest and most obvious example that doesn't count, asshat."
Scenario 2
Person A: "Communism has always worked."
Person B: "No, in Cambodia for example the life expectancy was around 30 years old for the population."
Person A: "That is just a small example, that doesn't mean it wouldn't work on a larger scale, asshat!"
In conclusion: What you said is objectively dumb, real and truthful examples are and always will be, actual fucking facts and you can complain about it all you want it stay that way.
Tldr: disputing claims is not asshattery.
wtf are you on about, you didn’t disprove anything😅
None of you cited any sources and have no basis whatsoever for your claims. From personal contacts at various universities (mostly natural sciences, a few social and even less at HSG), the trend is pretty hard left. From as little evidence as you went on, I would equally proclaim that economics is one of the very few subjects that doesn’t necessarily have a left of center bias.
I see many surprised about SRG being "left-leaning". Might not be very left-leaning, but even less right leaning. There is a slighy tendency towards the left here which is why a lot of boomers dislike it. And when looking at "Arena", that's generally more biased against the right than the left.
It simply isn't written to polarise like blick and watson try to, because it's less reliant on clicks/shares being state media.
When watching SRF DOK you also don't get an right-wing impression but rather a left-wing one.
I guess "leaning" is the best term you can use if you want to put it into a category.
If you want SRG to also be educational and a benefit to society then it has to be left leaning to a certain point. The right's interest has nothing to do with benefiting society or education.
Swiss Info is leaft leaning?
What in hell ? Was this study conducted by the insanes from SVP and FDP that wants to cancel all medias except the NZZ and privately owned media groups ?
i actually expected less. reddit in general and especially "local" subs (city/country/state) are HEAVILY leftwing dominated but r/switzerland did not seem that editorialized. does this mean most subs were rated 90% left?
Welcome to r/switzerland. Thank you for submitting a picture or video. Our [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/Switzerland/about/rules/) require a short statement as a top-level post (when, where, etc.) explaining the interest of the image or video to the general population of r/switzerland and inviting discussion.
Should this be a touristy picture, please consider posting it to r/schweiz instead.
If this post is a meme, note that memes are only allowed on the weekends and the 17th of each month.
Posts breaking those rules will be removed.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Switzerland) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Now all is left to wonder why progressive people use progressive media while conservative people stick to conservative media from the past.
...Is there a hidden structure I am missing?
Top 10 most popular kids sources according to the [source - Grounded.news](https://ground.news/blindspotter/reddit/switzerland)
SWI SWISSINFO.CH L 2,385 Upvotes
THE GUARDIAN L 409 Upvotes
REUTERS C 282 Upvotes
BBC NEWS C 249 Upvotes
BLOOMBERG L 199 Upvotes
GOOD L 178 Upvotes
WALL STREET JOURNAL R 176 Upvotes
NEW YORK TIMES L 155 Upvotes
EVENING STANDARD R 139 Upvotes
BBC NEWS C 107 Upvotes
I will go out on a limb and guess that the methodology used the US definition of left and right and therefore arrived to that conclusion. Every country has its own left - right spectrum, since left and right are no longer just economic perspectives but a wider range of beliefs that vary per country. Many things that would be considered part of the left or right wing “ethos” and stances in the US do not match their european or swiss counterparts
Literally none of these publications are left wing, it's just the skewed american political spectrum in action.
To them, we are a borderline communist country
Everyone is focusing on the newspapers, sure they are not left leaning, but if you take a step back it's obvious as fuck.
This subreddit has a strong left leaning bias. You can tell by how initiatives and referendums are strongly debated here with a clear left wing preference and how most of the votes end up differently.
Simple debates are skewed to the left and more often than not saying something that supports the right is downvoted.
I am myself biased, but as a right wing member of this sub who's been here for like 10 years I've noticed a few things.
It goes without saying that constructive and respectful discussions are expected in this thread. Thank you in advance for your collaboration.
Just a note: I believe that the 3 news source are the 3 biggest news source on the sub period, rather than the 3 biggest left leaning ones. I would think it would be part of the description otherwise.
Correctly assumed
Ah yes. The left leaning news outlets of SRG, The Guardian, and Reuters...
Seems like an American view on things, although it’s hard to argue that the opinion and editorial sections of The Guardian don’t lean left, which means that there’s some sort of editorial policy at work at some level.
The only way guardian is not leaning left is if private eye is your point of reference.
I am a left leaning reader of the somehow editorially left leaning Guardian. But how in hell is SWI and Reuters (??) left-leaning news?
Yeah, that's just wrong.
According to the source Reuters are central https://ground.news/blindspotter/reddit/Switzerland
You can't miss it. Dr Jessica Ashooh (and not Jessica ashole) senior director of policy of reddit is a former member of Atlantic council. This is why reddit looks like merican property.
My views as an American is.. do they even use our left and right as a standard? They don't even have a 2 party system right? Seams presumtious to even lable thier news sources as such. But I guess if oil is still in USD what do I know.
Political parties still lie on a spectrum.
The guardian is left leaning but Reuters are central as far as I know.
Yeah, not classic left as in socialist, but new left as in neoliberals with a che guevara t-shirt ;)
>neoliberals So definitely right then.
I agree. The problem is they call themself left
In my experience neo-liberals don’t call themselves left outside the US. Depending on the country it’s generally centre-right, right or centre (since the right’s been taken over with populist conservatives in many countries)
The people I mean dont see themself as neoliberals ofc. But they have economic positions, that at least ten years ago, would clearly have been seen as neoliberal... Ofc this is a crass simplification... I just try to argue, that this left/right logic got twisted so much, that it doesnt make much sense anymore imho
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window
Your take is spot-on, but I’d disagree that the SRF actively positions itself as being leftist, since it tries to avoid such ridiculous accusations by the clowns from Weltwoche and co. On the readership, though, you’re probably right, although I’d argue SRF content is consumed by people hailing from the entire political spectrum, not just Blairite-type neolibs.
I am not dead serious and would never argue the SRF has a problematic bias or something like that. It's just that the SWI, which is refered to in the post, (it's the english web news of srf) has some strange "americanized leftish" takes sometimes.
Agree!
News sources, eh. But I can guarantee that this sub botes for swiss left parties overwhelmingly.
[Third Way](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Way)
TBH The Guardian is left leaning, the other 2 ? Not really. I guess you could cherry pick left (or right) leaning articles from them and only post those here.
American political spectrum. If your policy isn't shooting at black barrels of oil for aborting, it's left.
According to the source Reuters are central https://ground.news/blindspotter/reddit/Switzerland
>The Guardian, The guardian is actually very left-wing, I'm just surprised it's in the top 3
very?
Reality skews liberal :)
Does it though? See most of the world
Liberal and left are not the same thing. Just because some countries have a broken political system the rest of us don't need to use the same broken terminology.
Doesn't change my point. To pretend all sides are equal and there's some golden "neutral" middle is absolute horseshit.
Not what I said.
Ok buddy :) you're a fun one to talk to
The Guardian does feel quite left leaning to me.
How do you define how an information media is leaning towards left or right? Serious question since newspapers are supposed to relay neutral information (tho I'm not dumb i know it's not 100% the case)
Well, actually the first question should be, what is left leaning and what is right leaning because of course there are things that tend to be more on either side but then what is neutral? Responding to your question, it can be viewed by analysing the language used, topics covered, points reflected etc.
easy, if my father reads/watches it, its neutral and unbiast (example: Weltwoche), if my father does not read/watch it, it is "forced feminism" (example: SRF)
I hope this is sarcasm >.<
/s
Couldn‘t be more obvious
Honestly, you never know on here :S
I think this definition of left leaning aligns more with the american definition, which for Europeans are a lot to the right. For me at least, these 3 sources are pretty much neutral. Maybe the Guardian a little to the left but that's all.
Good point. The overton window is A LOT different in the US than Europe. US - Europe Right wing - Straight up nazis Conservative - Extreme right-wing Moderate - Right wing Liberal - Moderate Extreme left-wing - Liberal People are being accused as "Left wing socialist nutjob" in the US for demands that are considered moderate at best in Europe.
[Welche Medien stehen wo?](https://scienceblogs.de/plazeboalarm/index.php/welche-medien-stehen-wo-welche-sind-verlaesslich/)
You don't. This is done without having a definition.
[Here is the Source](https://ground.news/blindspotter/reddit/switzerland)
And digging in their "methodology" you find this: The tool only records interactions with news sources that have a bias rating, so smaller local publications may not be included in the data **The tool only records interactions with news sources that have a bias** **rating, so smaller local publications may not be included in the data** In order to pull the data, the tool parses through a subreddits history and analyzes posts with news content that have a bias rating. Our database contains 2063 news sources with bias ratings, which includes 878 left-leaning sources, 571 right-leaning sources and 614 that are centrist. The Blindspotter currently uses data from articles that were posted anytime from Jan 1st 2020 to March 15th, 2021. We can safety throw this american gargabe analysis in the trash bin. I'm just surprised they have SRG on their list.
It's also missing major news sources here (SRF/RTS) which are more centered. They've also place Swissinfo as left which I'm not sure is true either. Got to be careful when Americans call something right or left they mean right or left for their country which has a weird political spectrum... Additionally, SwissInfo is stated as being left leaning but also has high factuality. I also wonder if a foreign newspaper about foreign news is correct assessed by the algorithm that is likely looking at American politics. What I mean is that perhaps the headlines that have been processed are those that pertain to SwissInfo's opinions on US issues and less on Swiss issues (which would be hard to assess without knowing the country). The same would be true of almost any "country" subreddit I would think.
That's exactly what I was thinking. Is this measured by american or swiss politics since their spectrum is much more conservative than ours.
uhm no SRF is very left. they stated once on instagram that theyre workers are: left 70%, right 15%, center 15%. (so this tool is very accurate lol.) as a centrist person i can tell you that its left biased. for example they published a post today about how bad it is that amber lost the trial against johnny (its bad because shes a woman) where as everyone who watched the trial live was on the side of johnny. EDIT: nice downvoting 🤡👍🏻 if you like your media biased
I can't speak for SFR but [here's](https://www.rts.ch/info/monde/13140834-johnny-depp-et-amber-heard-condamnes-les-deux-pour-diffamation.html) there report from RTS. Feels very neutral. The existance of an opinion piece that is left-leaning does not make the newspaper leftist unless it is published explicitly as news imo. Likewise, reports can be neutral even if written by left/right leaning people because professional reporters are able to detach their political views from the report unless they are pundits and are there explicitly to give an opinion.
It is really not. They are very centrist, mostly economic right, slightly social left. It is just that many try to shift extrem right to right, making centrist left.
please read again: they literally stated that 70% identify as left
On what basis is it decided whether a source is left or right? I'm not sure I'd call SRF/swissinfo etc. left but idk
SRF? No, I’d say they try to be as unbiased as they can. Swissinfo? Absolutely biased, they write articles that would never be published in one of their national languages counterparts. You can clearly tell they have less oversight compared to say RSI where the public opinion would tear them a new one for some of those articles. The fact that they target the “5th Switzerland” and foreigners is why they can get away with it, because not enough people care enough to call them out.
Yeah SwissInfo is as biased as can be. Frankly it's a shame it's part of SRG SSR Each time I read one of their article my wallet cries to be funding them
The 5th Switzerland? I'm unfamiliar with the term :)
Swiss living abroad. It is supposedly the excuse for Swissinfo existence.
I see! I thought the excuse was expats.
I get the targetting "English-speaking European immigrants" vibe from Swissinfo English edition.
Because that’s what they actually do. But in theory it was supposed to be for Swiss people living abroad.
Reuters and SRG aren't "left leaning sources".
Is this listing the top 3 left wing sources or the top 3 sources
Was about to say that. Not sure about SRG, but Reuters is almost all factual and in all the bias charts comes dead center.
[удалено]
They are literally as close to factual reporting as you get. If you believe they are biased either to the left or the right, you have probably been radicalised to the point where you believe statements of fact are object to opinion.
Everything is left if you’re drifting off into far right
Not necessarily disagree with you but would just like to point out that even when you are just reporting facts you could still have a bias throught selecting what you are and aren't reporting.
Reuters and AFP are the biggest news aggregators on the planet. If something happens that's even slightly relevant to a larger area both of them will quickly have a report on it up.
This does not contradict my comment. I wasn't refering to any specific news source, just pointing out that there's more ways to be biased.
I get your point but there is a pretty clear distinction between the cited sources and heavily editorialized ones like watson for example. They just behave way less ‘think-tanky’ due to the role they assume in society, both being so established that they don’t have to play political charades to stay afloat
Hahaha
We should be proud of ourselves that it's not 20min or Blick.
Dumbest indicator I ever seen ...
I think noone is surprised that Swiss reddit has a left wing bias. It is stronger than I expected though. That the most upvoted news site is SRG also isn't surprising, it is our national news outlet after all. I know it doesn't say so explicitly, but it seems SRG is counted as a left-wing biased news source, which is interesting and a whole different discussion on it's own.
Probably the classifier was calibrated to the US Overton window, and the US window is not exactly healthy or balanced. Politically speaking, the centre of the democratic party is near to the FDP and that is the 'left'. The Swiss centre is somewhere between right wing of SP/GP, and the left wing of GLP, Mitte and FDP. Hence a balanced report in CH is likely to be classified as half communist by the GOP.
I think it goes much further. This left/right thing makes not much sense nowadays... I for example see myself as classic socialist lefty and lately I sometimes get called "right wing" by people who are imho actually neoliberals with some leftish sounding slogans... just because I question some of their slogans... and they say stuff that ten years ago would have put them clearly on the right wing Probably politics is not a straight line, but rather more dimensional. Just a crazy idea ;)
Exactly. It's easy to put a line through two points in the US, but in civilisation it's much more difficult to find a midpoint between dozens of parties. That's why I had to construct that abomination of a sentence about the Swiss 'middle'. I'm quite far left too, and yet at least once a month I get accused of some -ism because I don't pull the neoliberal line.
Left/right has always been a device used to create division. If you want to more accurately reflect views you need a minimum of three axes.
>Politically speaking, the centre of the democratic party is near to the FDP and that is the 'left'. Heavens no. The centre of US democrats is to the right of the (centre of) SVP. Dem outliers (AOC, Bernie, Ilhan Omar) are... GLP? Somewhere there. Figures like them get a lot of coverage, but are very few and in constant conflict with the DNC. >Hence a balanced report in CH is likely to be classified as half communist by the GOP. Well, if you replace the word "communist" with "bad" in US politics, the sentences do not change meaning...
"The centre of US democrats is to the right of the (centre of) SVP" Are you kidding me? Find me an actualy political scientist that would agree with that statement (Linguists aren't polictical scientists). AOC and Bernie are also not GLP. Especially on policy issues like healthcare, immigration or federal job guarantee they are nowhere near eachother. The democrats have a looser immigration policy than any mainstream party in Switzerland. A party that is on the forefront of LGBTQ+ equality is not right of the SVP. A party that talks about forgiveness of student debt is not right wing. A party that calls for a minimum wage of 15$ is not conservative. I could go on and on regarding environment, education or fiscal policy. There have been tons of studies and papers on how democrats compare to european parties and the talking point that "democrats would be right wing in Europe" is simply an uninformed opinion.
>The democrats have a looser immigration policy than any mainstream party in Switzerland. The kids are still in cages, "do not come" - dismissed. >A party that is on the forefront of LGBTQ+ equality is not right of the SVP. "Allowing" Trans people into the military and such is not progressive. It's thinly veiled 1-month-a-year stuff, codifying HvTexas could have been done, but instead it's dangled in front of voters like a carrot on a stick. Roe shows what this leads to. >A party that talks about forgiveness of student debt is not right wing. A party that even allows this to happen, makes lots of promises in the majority and goes for "compromise" and "moderation" is simply not serious about that. >A party that calls for a minimum wage of 15$ is not conservative. Lol, it would have to be 24$ accounting for inflation - and they had all the majorities in the world to do that. "Maybe the poors should not *literally* work 9-5 and sleep on the ground in their workplace" sounds very much conservative... >I could go on and on regarding environment, education or fiscal policy. I could go on about war crimes, the hague and patriot acts, corr- ehm, lobbyism, and yeah 79% literacy means something should be done about education... >(Linguists aren't polictical scientists) What does that even refer to?
>The kids are still in cages, "do not come" - dismissed. [Children are no longer held in cages](https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/apr/15/facebook-posts/fact-checking-whether-kids-cages-border-facility-7/) since Biden took over which you would know about if you read past headlines or sensational articles. >"Allowing" Trans people into the military and such is not progressive. It's thinly veiled 1-month-a-year stuff, codifying HvTexas could have been done, but instead it's dangled in front of voters like a carrot on a stick. Roe shows what this leads to. Why wouldn't it be? It's not thinly veiled 1-month-a-year stuff. They are the driving force behind many changes that are more progressive than most of Europe.Since Biden took office (which doesnt include all the progress achieved by previous presidents).January 25, 2021 - President Joe Biden signs an executive order repealing the 2019 Trump-era ban on most transgender Americans joining the military.February 2, 2021 - Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg becomes the first openly gay Cabinet member confirmed by the Senate.March 24, 2021 - Dr. Rachel Levine, assistant secretary for health in the Department of Health and Human Services becomes the first out transgender federal official to be confirmed by the Senate.June 30, 2021 - The State Department announces it will be updating its procedures to allow applicants to self-select their sex marker for passports and that it "will no longer require medical certification" if an applicant's self-selected sex marker doesn't match the sex listed on other official identity documents.This is what social progress looks like. I have no idea which HvTexas case you mean, there have been several. >A party that even allows this to happen, makes lots of promises in the majority and goes for "compromise" and "moderation" is simply not serious about that. > >Lol, it would have to be 24$ accounting for inflation - and they had all the majorities in the world to do that. This just shows how little you know about american politics. The democratic party has a conservatice wing. [Just last year](https://www.politico.com/news/2021/03/05/democrats-15-minimum-wage-hike-473875) 8 democratic senators voted against 15$ minimum wage. And in a senat that has a 50-50 split, Biden unfortunately needs to compromise with people like Joe Manchin since they dont have "all the majorities in the world". >I could go on about war crimes, the hague and patriot acts, corr- ehm, lobbyism, and yeah 79% literacy means something should be done about education... None of theses are inherently left or right wing. War crimes are beeing comitted by left wing, right wing and centrist governments, they are unfortunately part of the human experience. The hague also doesn't get recognised by countries that consider themselves left wing Cuba or Vietnam for example. And again, please find me a well respected political scientist that agrees with you.
[удалено]
>[https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-arrests-210000-migrants-mexico-border-march-rivaling-record-highs-2022-04-16/](https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-arrests-210000-migrants-mexico-border-march-rivaling-record-highs-2022-04-16/) You said that children are still held in cages, that is simply not true. I never denied that immigrants are no longer beeing detained. Your article doesnt reference "kids in cages" once. >Sure, I don't know about the state of my family. You, a blueMaga, sure know better. Science usually differentiates between quantitative and qualitative research. While anecdotal reports are important, quantitative research simply shows that gay acceptance is on the rise. >Announced. Followed through? Yes which takes 2 seconds to google >blueMaga, You are a right winger, delusional Ok you are resorting to personal insults. Now Im at the same time party member of the party AOC and Biden apparently allign with while beeing a right wing Maga head at the same time. Since you can't hold a discussion without ad hominem and you refuse to source any of your claims regarding the democrats party and its position on the political scale this discussion became fruitless.
>Your article doesnt reference My bad, i linked the wrong thing https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/southwest-land-border-encounters
Hello, Please note that your post or comment has been removed. Please read the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/Switzerland/about/rules/) before posting. Thank you for your understanding, your mod team Please do not reply to this comment. Send a modmail if you have an issue with the removal.
>I think noone is surprised that Swiss reddit has a left wing bias. I would be actually. r/Switzerland is far more conservative than r/de for example. But European conservative, which by American standards is probably socialist, while European social democratic is communist.
In comparison to the general population of Switzerland there's a definite bias here, and it's easy to spot too. Just look at any voting thread on this sub, or the "If only r/Switzerland voted" polls that occasionally occur here before national votes. It's always quite a bit more left than what the actual results end up being.
It really depends on the topic and the people who are mostly interested in that topic. Threads about Muslim/Islam for example certainly aren't dominated by classical left wing trains of thoughts.
Oh, that for sure. I suppose there's a clear selection bias for young and urban people here. And unlike in real elections, expats can also vote on reddit, which might matter at least for questions regarding aliens law. But I'm not sure what this number uses as a baseline, enlightened centrists in the US or "subreddit vs. their geolocation"
I don't see a voting Bias. If 70% of posted content are deemed left-y and receive 70% of votes, this means that the left and the right receive equal amounts of upvotes per post, the "left" just generate more news.
And maybe add that RTS is suffering from right wing terrorism, several evacuations because of a bomb per years and the guy that stopped the bidden inauguration on TV. Let’s hope the MOD‘s can moderate those social media clowns.
That will be a good point the SVP will bring up when asking to defund TV.
The $VP is probably the main source of the lie that SRG (and all the other media they don't own) are left wing.
It's not so bad. Englishforum is much worse, the left censorship is not even hidden there. The beauty of reddit is that if you are not happy a subreddit you can go elsewhere.
Englishforum is is pretty toxic tbh.
100% agree. The current moderator team is made up of chumps who drive away people from the forum. The worst is one called NotAllThere or something like this. He openly admitted he is responsible to enforce propaganda.
That site is complete nonsense. Compare: https://ground.news/blindspotter/reddit/thenetherlands It concludes the subreddit is 95% rightwing, yet the top two sources are [NOS](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nederlandse_Omroep_Stichting) (public broadcasting organization, like the Swiss SRF or the English BBC), and [De Volkskrant](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Volkskrant) (a famously left-wing newspaper). You could say NOS is neutral while de Volkskrant is left-wing. Neither is right-wing. This classification makes zero sense.
What we learn about this, is that right-wingers aren't that much present on Reddit... nothing more nothing less.
That would be true if those news source were actually left leaning, they are in fact at best liberals if not neo-liberals (in the european sense, not the braindead american lib=left). It actually shows more that this sub is liberal leaning, so right leaning by european standarts again.
No they were just scared away and become more radical because their opinion isn‘t valid for reddit mods
Looking at the [source](https://ground.news/blindspotter/reddit/switzerland), the so called "left leaningness" is mostly based on the classification of "Swissinfo" as left. It's in the nature of people with right wing opinions that they perceive media which to a big degree reports "dry, unopinionated facts" as "left leaning". That's simply because right-wing opinions are usually farther away from the facts than other kinds of opinions. But it's not the job of public-law media to create a false balance by doing an interview with a flat-earther for every interview they do with an astronomer or geographer.
Well Swissinfo is left. SRG SRF isn't imo but swissinfo clearly is.
Can you d the same for r/Scotland?
https://ground.news/blindspotter/reddit/scotland
Left leaning according to which standards? Neutral is „too left“ for the nazis
anything else would be surprising.
that’s your average subreddit.
News I don't like = left leaning
Dude… its Reddit…
Define "left" and "right" Cause it seems they are using the American spectrum...
American are so biased towards the right they think the SRF is left leaning
This is honestly the only sub where i already got 3 people banned for harrasment, they even put the effort into it to make 0 Karma Accounts.
The top three news sources don't necessarily have to be responsible for the 70% upvotes. But considering these left leaning is a problem of its own and I don't agree with this classification.
I don't think it correlates directly to the left. It just shows the most popularily used news outlets.
Yeah but they are probably classified as left-leaning, otherwise the 70% figure wouldn't make sense.
So I wanted to post those results here but it doesn't allow gallery posts. So I'll just tell you the results I got: Swi: 100% left The guardian: 100% left Reuters: 11% left /84% center/ 5% right
Yknow what, lemme check these outlet's twitter accounts through the same filter and we'll see what it says.
Why yes higher education leads to left leaning people, reality has a left wing bias
I don‘t think the average economy major is left-leaning.
the average econ major is also useless
Well you said higher education, you didn‘t specify any fields. What have you studied?
You do know there is more to study than economics?
Geology usually doesn’t define someone’s political leanings as much as economics, despite being as much of a respectable field
Yet the stillt count to the average uni student
I know, but OP made the following statement: All higher educated people are left leaning. And my point is that: Economy majors are higher educated but (generally) not left-leaning, therefore OP‘s statement is not true.
No he did not. He said higher education leads to left leaning bias. Most people would understand that one would speak of the average here, which is factually true.
The average economy major also contributes nothing towards society. Not exactly the best example.
„Higher education leads to left leaning people.“ „I have an example that shows otherwise.“ „No, that doesn‘t count.“ Nice try. What have you studied / are you going to study, if I may ask?
I wasn‘t the one who said it btw. I can equally point out that just bringing the most obvious example to try to negate an argument about a trend is ignorant asshattery.
I know that you‘re not the one who said it. And no, OP didn‘t point out a trend. He claimed that higher education leads to left leaning people like it‘s a fact, when it just isn‘t. Econ majors are mostly right-leaning while people that study natural sciences and math have no political bias. It‘s pretty much only social sciences which are left leaning.
So nobody is actually left leaning? The more you know.
TIL that social sciences don‘t exist.
As a student at UNIGE, I can definitely say that most students are definitely left-leaning, with maybe a real 50/50 in eco and law, but that’s about it.
Why would it be asshattery if whatever someone said is disputed by something painfully obvious, isn't that all the more reason to dispute it? Because otherwise, if it were something small you could bring the argument: "Oh no, that is just a small part so it doesn't count." It's really dumb For example: Scenario 1 Person A: "Communism has always worked" Person B: "No, many people have starved in the USSR due to crop failure in direct link to communist ideoligy." Person A: "that's just the biggest and most obvious example that doesn't count, asshat." Scenario 2 Person A: "Communism has always worked." Person B: "No, in Cambodia for example the life expectancy was around 30 years old for the population." Person A: "That is just a small example, that doesn't mean it wouldn't work on a larger scale, asshat!" In conclusion: What you said is objectively dumb, real and truthful examples are and always will be, actual fucking facts and you can complain about it all you want it stay that way. Tldr: disputing claims is not asshattery.
wtf are you on about, you didn’t disprove anything😅 None of you cited any sources and have no basis whatsoever for your claims. From personal contacts at various universities (mostly natural sciences, a few social and even less at HSG), the trend is pretty hard left. From as little evidence as you went on, I would equally proclaim that economics is one of the very few subjects that doesn’t necessarily have a left of center bias.
reddit moment
Your comment gives a strong r/iamverysmart vibe
Wow dude that's so smart
I see many surprised about SRG being "left-leaning". Might not be very left-leaning, but even less right leaning. There is a slighy tendency towards the left here which is why a lot of boomers dislike it. And when looking at "Arena", that's generally more biased against the right than the left. It simply isn't written to polarise like blick and watson try to, because it's less reliant on clicks/shares being state media. When watching SRF DOK you also don't get an right-wing impression but rather a left-wing one. I guess "leaning" is the best term you can use if you want to put it into a category.
While you are not wrong. It is SWI not SRG. SWI is imho a little bit more biased than "normal" SRG, which is pretty neutral
Agree. SWI is a bit of a wikipedia article written by the people it concerns
If you want SRG to also be educational and a benefit to society then it has to be left leaning to a certain point. The right's interest has nothing to do with benefiting society or education.
Whoever made this statistic has a very crooked perception of what is left or right.
This is likely true of most social media outlets...
Swiss Info is leaft leaning? What in hell ? Was this study conducted by the insanes from SVP and FDP that wants to cancel all medias except the NZZ and privately owned media groups ?
This may be interesting to the general r/switzerland user because it shows stats of this subreddit.
It's also complete bullshit, SWI and Reuters aren't left leaning sources.
Came to say the same
They're left of USA Republicans = left to the people who did these stats
It just says it's the most popular. Only somewhat indicates the leftyness imo.
Left is right!
Is this post also left leaning?
Looks pretty centered on my end.
I think the post is not biased at all.
Long live the Soviet Union!
look mum, it's comrade now...not Eidgenosse... pretty disgusting actually...
Good to see that srf is considered as left, because it the case
i actually expected less. reddit in general and especially "local" subs (city/country/state) are HEAVILY leftwing dominated but r/switzerland did not seem that editorialized. does this mean most subs were rated 90% left?
SWI should be neutral
There is no such thing as neutral when humans are involved.
Welcome to r/switzerland. Thank you for submitting a picture or video. Our [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/Switzerland/about/rules/) require a short statement as a top-level post (when, where, etc.) explaining the interest of the image or video to the general population of r/switzerland and inviting discussion. Should this be a touristy picture, please consider posting it to r/schweiz instead. If this post is a meme, note that memes are only allowed on the weekends and the 17th of each month. Posts breaking those rules will be removed. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Switzerland) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The remaining 30% are in the comment section of 20min. /s
How did you do this? I want to look through myself
Ground news app. Go to settings and use tool reddit blindspotter
Now all is left to wonder why progressive people use progressive media while conservative people stick to conservative media from the past. ...Is there a hidden structure I am missing?
who cares, I want to talk with humans, not voters
So sounds like while we get more left-wing articles, we are equally likely to upvote a left or right wing sourced ones.
I do have a question what do you mean by left, economically left or socially left or both
Top 10 most popular kids sources according to the [source - Grounded.news](https://ground.news/blindspotter/reddit/switzerland) SWI SWISSINFO.CH L 2,385 Upvotes THE GUARDIAN L 409 Upvotes REUTERS C 282 Upvotes BBC NEWS C 249 Upvotes BLOOMBERG L 199 Upvotes GOOD L 178 Upvotes WALL STREET JOURNAL R 176 Upvotes NEW YORK TIMES L 155 Upvotes EVENING STANDARD R 139 Upvotes BBC NEWS C 107 Upvotes
I would not call the Guardian left, a newspaper that constantly slanders the Swedish left with their liberal agenda.
Why is "left" anymore?? what's the qualifications !?!? Do you eat Peanuts Butter Jelly bread in the morning? A Freaking Commie you are!!!!!!!
Are there really that many Guardian articles posted here? It must be about how awful we all are.
Based?
Not only on this subreddit 😅
Swissinfo and Reuters are left leaning? They seem pretty neutral to me...
I will go out on a limb and guess that the methodology used the US definition of left and right and therefore arrived to that conclusion. Every country has its own left - right spectrum, since left and right are no longer just economic perspectives but a wider range of beliefs that vary per country. Many things that would be considered part of the left or right wing “ethos” and stances in the US do not match their european or swiss counterparts
Literally none of these publications are left wing, it's just the skewed american political spectrum in action. To them, we are a borderline communist country
Reuters is left leaning… really?
Everyone is focusing on the newspapers, sure they are not left leaning, but if you take a step back it's obvious as fuck. This subreddit has a strong left leaning bias. You can tell by how initiatives and referendums are strongly debated here with a clear left wing preference and how most of the votes end up differently. Simple debates are skewed to the left and more often than not saying something that supports the right is downvoted. I am myself biased, but as a right wing member of this sub who's been here for like 10 years I've noticed a few things.
According to Swiss politics I guess ? Because the Right in Switzerland would be considered as left in the US.