This site is bias and ignores questions when prompted
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
You are not alone: users across large Q&A sites report many legitimate reasons their questions go unanswered — volume, tagging, and interface settings — rather than a coordinated “ignoring” conspiracy (see community research and Meta discussion) [1] [2]. Separately, accusations that a news or government site is “biased and ignores questions” mirror ongoing debates about media-bias tools such as the White House’s Media Bias Portal and critics who say it targets mainstream outlets and solicits public tips [3] [4] [5] [6].
1. Why your questions go unanswered: system limits, not necessarily malice
Longstanding community research finds a structural explanation: roughly a third of posted questions receive little to no community attention because there are simply more questions than active reviewers — an “emergent property” of the site, not a secret policy to ignore specific people [1]. Meta guidance points to practical cures — clarify and edit your question, post on Meta for visibility, or offer a bounty — all recommended paths to attract attention rather than assuming bias [2] [7].
2. UI settings often make questions invisible to you or others
Multiple Meta threads show that ignored tags and “hide ignored tags” preferences can make questions appear missing or faded for users who set those options; the same user can inadvertently hide content they later call “ignored” [8] [9] [10]. Site changes and bugs have at times broken those preferences, producing pages with few or no visible questions — a technical or configuration cause, not intentional content filtering directed at specific askers [11] [12].
3. Design tradeoffs: client-side hiding and scale problems
Stack Exchange’s hiding logic is often implemented client-side to reduce server load; that design choice explains why ignored posts may still be fetched then masked, and why interface contrast and accessibility issues make ignored items hard to process for some users [9] [13]. The community recognizes these accessibility and usability tradeoffs even as it resists server-side personalization that would complicate the system at scale [9] [1].
4. What Meta moderators and experienced users recommend you do next
Concrete, source-backed steps from Meta threads: check your profile preferences for ignored tags and the “hide ignored tags” toggle [10] [8]; edit questions to improve clarity and trigger a “bump” to the front page [7]; publish a Meta post to ask why your post may be overlooked or to raise a bug [2]. These steps are documented community remedies and have repeatedly been offered as the proper channel to resolve “ignored” questions [2] [7].
5. When “ignored” is actually a bug — and how the community handles it
Users have documented genuine bugs: site releases have sometimes reset or ignored user preferences [11]. Those incidents are investigated on Meta and tracked by staff and volunteers; the presence of bug reports and temporary regression posts shows the community’s governance model relies on visibility through Meta rather than private appeals [11] [12].
6. The media-bias parallel: public sites that accuse others of bias and invite tips
If your complaint is about a news or government site being “biased and ignoring questions,” note that the recent White House Media Bias Portal explicitly solicits public tips and catalogs alleged misinformation, and critics (The Guardian, Committee to Protect Journalists) argue it names journalists and mainstream outlets while using partisan language — a different but related debate about transparency versus political targeting [4] [3] [5] [6]. That initiative shows how labeling something “biased” can be institutionalized and contested in public forums [4] [3].
7. Competing viewpoints and hidden agendas to watch for
On one side, site operators and some advocates treat tip portals or ignored-tag features as tools for quality, efficiency, and public accountability [4] [8]. On the other, journalists, watchdogs, and community critics warn that centralized “bias” lists or opaque interface rules can weaponize moderation or chill independent reporting and contribution [5] [6] [1]. Be explicit about which mechanism you’re criticizing — personal question visibility settings and community norms differ from government-run “bias” databases and invite different remedies [8] [4] [5].
Limitations: My account is limited to the cited Meta discussions on ignored questions, interface settings, and the public reporting on the White House Media Bias Portal; available sources do not mention your specific account details or whether a platform moderator personally targeted you.