My mother, born, raised, and still lives in Norway, was anti-mask during COVID and refused to take the vaccine because of micro-robots (and the scary 5G towers), so we all know where she stands in certain topics. She also believes that Zelenskyy is the reason for Russia invading Ukraine…
Anyhoo, I was talking to her then other day, and she told me that I need to stop reading anti-propaganda. I laughed and asked if she could explain it, which she, of course, could not, but she said it’s a wording being used online all the time. I don’t frequent the sites she does, and I’ve known she’s been reading conspiracies for at least 10 years, but anti-propaganda? Does words not have meaning anymore?
If you ask me, anti-propaganda is facts, but hey, I might be wrong, considering English is my second language.
I like the Oxford dictionary definition:
“The systematic dissemination of information, esp. in a biased or misleading way, in order to promote a particular cause or point of view, often a political agenda.”
So, it doesn’t matter what the bias is. It’s still propaganda. The opposite of that would be a balanced view without any bias. So, would that also imply restricting to just factual information?
Beyond a diverse sourcing of information one could consider sources which present their bias up front.
An analysis seated in a well communicated philosophy is better than one with its motive hidden behind a mask.
Furthermore, information being factual isn’t enough to be unbiased. Bias also applies to the selection of information being presented, or more importantly, not presented.