this post was submitted on 28 Jul 2026
-1 points (33.3% liked)

Wild Feed

595 readers
73 users here now

A catch-all world journalism community for news, reports, blogs, editorials, and whatever.

Tag if needed:

[NSFW] and [Content Warning - x] — At your discretion.

[D/M/Y] — If the publication is older than a month. You can just tag the year if the article is more than a year old.

[Month and/or year] — For old but relevant articles. Use your best judgement.

[Conspiracy Tuesday] — Conspiracy theories/occult themes/cryptids/pseudoscience. On Tuesdays.

[E-mail required] — If an e-mail is needed to sign in.

[Archive link in post] — For paywalls and account sign-ins, link the main article in the URL, paste the archive link in the text body.

*Current means the article contains the most up to date publically available information on the subject, within reason. Older publications are welcome as long as they include a date tag.

*Good quality means the source has a good reputation for accurate journalism with a reasonably clean fact checking record.

Check out !Independent_Media@lemmy.today for independent news from around the world or !indy_news_canada@sh.itjust.works for Canadian independent publications.

All communities were created with the goal of increasing media literacy and media pluralism.

Sources posted here include:

https://americanlibrariesmagazine.org/

https://www.apa.org/

apnews.com/

https://www.theatlantic.com/

https://www.bbc.com/

https://www.earth.com/

https://www.theguardian.com/international

https://www.lawfaremedia.org/

https://lithub.com/

https://www.mentalfloss.com/

https://www.newscientist.com/

http://psychologytoday.com/

https://www.thequint.com/

https://www.reuters.com/

https://www.rfi.fr/en/

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/

https://time.com/

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/us

Icon image by z0r0z on pixabay, depicting a silhouette of a world map on a paint-splattered background.

Banner image by Lucentius on pixabay, depicting crumpled newpapers.

founded 9 months ago
MODERATORS
 

Despite the adage “seeing is believing,” what you see isn’t always what you get. Consider the viral dress photo of 2015 that split viewers into two camps: one who said the dress was white and gold and one who said it was black and blue. More than just a fun optical illusion, the phenomenon highlighted how multiple people can look at the same image or event and walk away with strikingly different interpretations. Such differences in perception can take on far greater weight when the stakes are high. To some viewers, police body camera footage can show blatant use of excessive force, while others watch the same clip and see an officer acting responsibly. Whose reality is the “real” one?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] HubertManne@piefed.social -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

only unbiased observation is relevant. people who were part of or work for the place that did the inpropriaty or the ones who put them in charge should not be taken into account. anyone who could profit or has a vested interest.

[–] Wren@lemmy.today 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The article points out there is no such thing as unbiased observation.

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social -2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

thats one of those things that is technically true. there is massive obvious bias and then bias made of a persons preconceptions or such. massive obvious bias like where you paycheck comes from should not be taken into account.

[–] Wren@lemmy.today 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I'm so tempted to start banning people who comment without reading the article.

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I would go with it. Its your community. Make it what you want it to be. Just don't complain later about a lack of engagement.

[–] Wren@lemmy.today 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I'd rather get no notifications than random nonsense from people who didn't actually engage with the article.

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 1 points 1 day ago

Ok. yeah so I would go forward with the idea then.