Nicolas T. sent me a cool link to Fairspin, a website where readers rate the bias of news articles.
This is the type of site that works better the more people who use it – the larger the readership the more likely the bias measurement will reflect that of the population’s. Indeed this is the sites biggest challenge – it could be taken over by readers of a certain political stripe who over rate the news bias against them, discrediting the sites ranking system.
Looking over the site I got an additional thought. The Vancouver Sun and/or the Globe and Mail sometimes have an editorial from 50 or 100 years ago. This got me thinking that it might be interesting for a site like this is to take random stories that were rated on the site and put them back to users in 2, 5 and 10 years. The reason to do this is to see if readers in 10 years rate the bias differently then they do today. This might give us an additional read to see how what is perceived as “right” and “left” evolve over time.
It would also be interesting if they removed attribution for the articles before somebody rated their bias. I'm willing to bet that “Forbes”/”Wallstreet Journal” immediately cue people to presuppose a right-leaning bias before they even read the content – confirmation bias being what it is, people will look for information that confirms their supposition rather than take the whole into account.