Confirmation Bias is More Complicated Than People Think: by Rick McLaughlin

The issue I pick is the foreign policy of Donald Trump covered by CNN and Fox News dealing with confirmation bias.


First I have to say that this is the story that I wanted most and least to talk about, its as interesting as it is controversial, the most controversial man in America talking about the most controversial hot bottom issue aside from abortion which is the issue of war and peace. I also want to try to discredit confirmation bias on terms that doesn't work the way people seem to think it does(someone looking up information that is similar to their point of view and them holding onto that view all the more strongly.


The CNN article and the Fox News article seem very much like each other. They both seem to be critical of Trumps isolationist views but seem to do so in different ways. CNN seems try to discredit him by showing criticism made by his GOP competitors. Fox News seems to go after him by mentioning him saying positive things about Vladimir Putin.

What happens when the Bias is the same according to all networks? What happens in my theory is oppositional bias.


This is the first hole I see in the confirmation bias theory, often times the information you get is almost the same. Both of CNN and Fox News strongly support foreign interventionism but I think their do it in covert ways because people would wonder why the media elites are pushing it so strongly. This is the biggest whole I see in the confirmation bias theory, because one of the things that made me feel so strongly about how our elites are trying to push us into several pointless wars is because they have overdone it with the propaganda. From my personal experience people want to see views challenged, even their own views. When they are presented with one viewpoint over and over it strikes them as weird and unusual. That's not to say that this applies for everyone. Many people will doubtless have their biases confirmed by both sides of the political spectrum and believe in an interventionist foreign policy all the more. I talk to these people all the time and its very hard to get through to someone who believes the media on all things. One hole in my own theory is that my dissatisfaction with how the mainstream media covers these issues is my subscription to the alternative media and the fact that I'm more likely to get my news from YouTube channels such https://www.youtube.com/user/StormCloudsGathering. This lends evidence to the idea that we seek out information that supports our viewpoints. I still disagree. Here's why.


Though  I do go to sites that fit my viewpoint but plenty of times I go to sites that I hate. Free Republic, PoliceOne before it was closed to the public, and TheBlaze are the best places, especially the comments section. Being a political science major its easy to get VERY jaded so often I need a reminder of why I fight and what keeps me fighting. I just need five minutes five minutes and I go from giving up on a major that sometimes honestly numbs me from caring and makes me want to move back to Florida and joining the band my friend runs, HateReads take me to a place where I want to live my life in service to others by providing them with the essential commodity of truth. So I intentionally do try to confirm my biases, but not in the way most people imagine it. I'm not the only person to do this, just Google "hate reads". https://www.google.com/webhp?gws_rd=ssl#q=hatereads


More than conformational bias I see oppositional bias where people feed off of their beliefs being challenged and grow complacent when their not. What I'm trying to say isn't that confirmation bias doesn't exist but I believe its not a cut and dry concept and their is much room for nuance.