Comparing a newspaper with Cambridge Analytica is simply absurd.
Newspaper will always have some sort of bias because they are written by human beings and the bias is harmless as long as it's understood and recognized by the readership.
Facebook manipulation, OTOH, is completely stealth because each reader gets a completely custom newsfeed.
> Newspaper will always have some sort of bias because they are written by human beings and the bias is harmless as long as it's understood and recognised by the readership.
I would agree if there wasn't coordinated hit pieces between newspapers or if newspapers didn't appear to collectively ignore certain pertinent events.
But the problem is that the bias often isn't understood by the readership - a lot of people consider the Guardian, NY Times and similar to be sources of unbiased, objective truth, despite the impossibility of that being the case. And those newspapers own branding only tries to encourage that view.
Newspaper will always have some sort of bias because they are written by human beings and the bias is harmless as long as it's understood and recognized by the readership.
Facebook manipulation, OTOH, is completely stealth because each reader gets a completely custom newsfeed.