• FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zoneOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Bad comparison. Rotten Tomatoes is user generated. And opinions on movies have much less reprocussions than opinion on news sources. Rotten tomatoes makes clear it is the “opinion” on the movie.

    MBFC is some random guy with no credential’s opinion. But they present their opinion as a neutral impartial rating.

    Also I don’t downvote, disabled on my instance, just saying why others might.

    • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Some random guy may not be the best, but also a hivemind can often be just as bad. For instance if lemmy.ca ranked news sources, and lemmy.ml ranked the same news sources, I imagine the results would be different.

      I agree the impact is different for sure, I just used the first “ranked” system that came to mind that I figured you would be familiar with.

      Example. If you rank Empire Strike back a 5/10 and I rank it a 8/10, then we rank Avatar and I give it a 4/10 and you give it a 9/10, on imdb they would both be ranked a 6.5/10. on RT one would be a 100% and the other 50%. (Why I don’t care for RT)

      But your right, not a fair comparison

      • catloaf@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 months ago

        Also, movies are entertainment, not misinformation and disinformation shaping our society, so there’s less scrutiny.

        (Yeah, media shapes our views too, but not as much as direct news journalism.)