Unions and Bias

[Dface]

@Elliot

Topic Summary: Can you spot the bias in this tweet?

Here’s the tweet:

@Elliot

The ““supply chain crisis”” is a clever rebrand. It makes it seem like there are grand exogenous forces at work rather than the unions holding ports for ransom while dozens of ships pile up, working just 2 shifts with a 2 hour break in between, the country at their mercy.

I think it may be hard to spot a bias cuz I don’t know about one. But looking up a definition can help…I saw some online from Gemini which quoted some of Merriam Webster. I also saw some from Merriam Webster and Psychology tToday. I still don’t think I fully get it but I got an idea of it.

@Elliot

The ““supply chain crisis”” is a clever rebrand.

This seems like a conclusion based on a bias and looking at the situation. Like, cuz you saw the situation a certain way that led you to come up with the conclusion.

My question is why is the supply chain crisis a clever rebrand? Why is it a rebrand? Why is that rebrand clever? Why is ““supply chain crisis”” in quotes? Rebrand seem like it would suggest a different problem is going on than what meets the eye. A rebrand was made so that actual problem wasn’t paid attention to. Calling the rebrand clever seems like it’s to show that the rebrand has some ground to it so it makes people believe that’s what it is.

@Elliot

It makes it seem like there are grand exogenous forces at work rather than the unions holding ports for ransom while dozens of ships pile up, working just 2 shifts with a 2 hour break in between, the country at their mercy.

What do both 'it’s refer to in the beginning of the sentence? I think calling the situation a ‘supply chain crisis’ makes it seem that there’s those grand exogenous forces at play

@Elliot

It makes it seem like there are grand exogenous forces at work

there being grand exogenous forces is a claim you can make an error about. Like, a bias can cause an error here. How? Idk I think you can misinterpret what someone says and classify it as them saying there’s grand exogenous forces at work.

What would the bias be? For or against unions. For or against supply chains…like something about them. If you’re against unions, then the bias could cause an error thinking that unions are causing errors. Something they’re doing is making an error for the whole system.

@Elliot

rather than the unions holding ports for ransom while dozens of ships pile up

This is another claim where a bias can cause an error. How are the unions holding the ports for ransom? Ransom seems like a strong word. The part where it says dozens of ships pile up seems to be where the problem is happening.

It seems that holding ports for ransom is what’s having ships pile up. The bias could be against the ships. Pointing out they pile up as a problem.

@Elliot

working just 2 shifts with a 2 hour break in between, the country at their mercy.

Who’s working those 2 shifts? The ships or the unions? I think it’s the unions but idk why

I read ahead of the post and replies so I got some extra info. I thought something about reading the following report from the tweet:

@Elliot

Before any changes this coming week, the longshore routine at the ports involve two shifts: 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. and 6 p.m. to 3 a.m. An overnight shift of five hours is available, but it is up to 50% more expensive and rarely used, say liner and terminal operators who foot the bill. Cargo pickups on Saturday are also rare, being charged as premium shifts, and there is no work on Sundays.

I think if you have a bias against the unions you could think that it’s the unions’ fault for cargo pickups being rare on overnights and Saturdays. I would question why is it so expensive? Why are they rarely used? I think if cargo picks weren’t so rare then ships wouldn’t be piling up. Because tweeter doesn’t like unions he sees that that’s their fault. Idk for sure