Has Vox always been extremely biased or was there a time when they were more center-left?

Hey guys, I'm writing an article currently and part of it I go over the history of Vox. Shot in the dark, but was there an exact moment when their reporting became overtly biased? Has it always been biased?

Attached: Screen Shot 2019-06-07 at 11.36.09 PM.png (526x322, 43K)

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JournoList
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

pretty sure it was just a ramp up from far left sprinkle to far left downpour

i don't follow any journal in particular but they became way more extremist after trump (all of them, not just vox)

This is the most reliable and reputable source to research your article? Good luck.

pretty good way to sum it up

lol I just figured someone might have been a fan or something at one point.

So you get some dude's opinion contributed anonymously which is worth what to your article? You're either a bad writer your job or bad at making interesting threads.

I'm a fan of gassing your entire class of people

(((Vox))) has always been far left trash.

>Shot in the dark, but was there an exact moment when their reporting became overtly biased? Has it always been biased?
any news organization which exhibits the critical thinking skills of an average twitter user is going to be garbage. but it's going to be worse than garbage, because people will believe the organization has some form of authority to it - so it MUST be true.
vox has always focused on shallow, surface level reporting. why go to a place like vox, when people can just use twitter?

possibly a little of both
Just looking for a jumping on point mainly, but now I'm just watching all the earlier videos now to compare and contrast to the videos published around the election and the videos published this year.

You likely won't find a smoking gun. Take a random sampling of articles by month year by year and see if you can find a perceptible change in tone as the years progress. Narrow your search month by month until you can find that inflection point. Do the same for their video division.

Congrats, you've consumed hours of Vox articles for some dumbshit article about some forgettable skirmish in this decade-long culture war. I hope you enjoy the fifteen cents worth of ad revenue your article will generate. You can buy some penny candies with that or invest it.

Bro I LOVE Penny candies! Haha, but thanks for the advice man. I really appreciate it.

I'm hoping to make it informative and an engaging read, but it just might be worthless in a month. I'm still having fun writing it though

Hobbies are good. Writing helps you figure out how your view the world by formalizing it with language. Don't pretend you are writing this article for anybody but yourself though. This didn't warrant a thread and could have been put in one of the countless other threads on the topic.

You're right. I defiantly should have just found another Vox or Carlos or Crowder thread to ask this question. Thanks for the honesty man.

They were always meant to be used for propaganda and personal attacks, since day one.

Look at any of their videos or articles, with ad-blocker on of course. The information presented is always misleading and/or wrong. They know what they're doing, and it's working sadly.

Just a quick question, is this vox the same as the vox company who make guitar amps ?

I found one really good video about the Charlie Hebdo attacks and critcizing the American Intervention of Syria. But then in like the same months, I found terrible videos like The Myth of Race and Diversity Problems of The Oscars posted around the same time. So there were some decent reporting back in Early Vox, but still a lot of the gay virtue signaling shit too

And you can plagiarize and pilfer at will and no can sue you, hack that you are

meh, I'm not trying to plagiarize and pilfer. Just like I said, find a good jumping on point.
I am using some of the tips given though to find a point where they went full outrage and crazy and such.

It's pretty fun, I'm enjoying it

no....

I've been an avid listener of Vox's The Weeds since it's inception, they truly are a solid source of deep dive content for random political shit (mostly healthcare). Ezra is always hard left leaning but mostly reasonable, but holy fuck in the last 6 months matt has gone off the rails

It has always been biased. Look up Ezra Klein (Vox Founder) and the Journolist scandal. He was a Washington Post reporter and it leaked that he set up a ring of left wing (((journalists))) who would all coordinate their propaganda and decide what to shill. This was when the Post had some integrity, so he was forced to "resign", and he started Vox shortly after.

Link to Journolist
>JournoList (sometimes referred to as the J-List)[1] was a private Google Groups forum for discussing politics and the news media with 400 "left-leaning"[2] journalists, academics and others. Ezra Klein created the online forum in February 2007 while blogging at The American Prospect and shut it down on June 25, 2010 amid wider public exposure. Journalists later pointed out various off-color statements made by members of the list denigrating conservatives, as well as a seeming conspiracy to prop up then Presidential candidate Barack Obama. Others defended such statements as being taken out of context or simply a matter of private candor.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JournoList

i used to really like Vox as they made some great videos on their youtube back in the day.
now its just fucking politics.
Why can't we ever have anything nice?

Holy Shit, that's insane! I'm looking it up right now. That's hilarious that they tried to make another one only to get busted again weeks later on a random blog hah!

Right? I couldn't believe how many super interesting videos they used to have.

You should write about the self-destructive phenomenon of modern journalism. Bias and advocacy journalism resulting in lost credibility, lost audience, lost occupation, lost profession. Journalists are destroying not only their personal careers, but the entire profession because their naive (they are mostly young, in their 20s) desire to “change the world”, based on lofty ideals coupled with a limited knowledge and understanding of how it works, overrides honesty, integrity and objectivity as happens with anyone who advocates rather than reports.

To advocate is to believe the cause is a more important value than are those of honesty and objectivity. The cause justifies the deceit. But the public, generally older, even if by just a few years, and thus wiser, sees this bullshit and turns away.