In 1948, the Chicago Daily Tribune ran a headline incorrectly claiming that Thomas Dewey had defeated President Harry Truman in the U.S. presidential election. The deadlines that compelled the Tribune to go to press before the election results were certain are an example—one of many—of circumstances that lead to incorrect news. Someone who only reads one paper is as likely to be misled today as in 1948.
Q Why did you make this site?
We found that we were misinformed by individual news outlets over and over again. A hot take would be repeated throughout the media, and the few dissenting voices—voices which would eventually be proven correct—would escape our attention. At other times we would miss a story entirely, especially when that story was inconvenient for the news sources we frequented. No more.
Q Why present both sides?
Humans—even when they strive for objectivity—have biases and agendas. One side amplifies stories or angles that the other side minimizes.
Deliberately restricting your reading to one side of the debate is a form of self-deceit. Filtering out negative facts about your side and positive
facts about the other is very comfortable. Do you have the courage to put truth before intellectual comfort?
Q Do you remove links to articles that contain misinformation?
No. The best way to address misinformation is more information, not censorship. Censorship reflects the bias of the censor and limits the confidence
you can (or should) have in the remaining information.
You are intelligent: If presented with two competing claims, you can research and judge between them. We bring you the competing claims.
Q Why are some of your news topics a jumble of unrelated articles?
Our algorithm is young & still learning. Some times it's a bit of a free spirit. We hope the results will still give you broad overview of the news quickly.
Q How do you determine political alignment of a news organization?
This is the most controversial aspect of DeweyWins.com. We examine many kinds of evidence:
Explicit acknowledgment by staff of the organization's political alignment
Which stories are treated as front page news for weeks vs. relegated to the back pages or ignored entirely
Use of loaded or biased language; presenting value judgments and opinion as fact
Retractions, edits, stealth edits, etc. that tend to skew one way; which narratives are "too good to check"
Dissimilar treatment of individuals and organizations by political party
Articles and endorsements by editorial staff
Internal politics—What sort of tweet gets a writer in trouble, etc.
Representation of one side in most editorial products such as "news analysis".
Q The sources you list for my side are actually objective and neutral and pure as the driven snow, while those on the other side are crazed conspiracy theorists/hopelessly partisan/not real news!
That's not a question. (But you weren't really thinking it anyway, were you?)