How Graham's hierarchy of disagreement allows us to objectively judge media and politicians.

I'm not sure if anyone has thought of this before, but Graham's hierarchy of disagreement gives us a quantitative way of objectively assessing the quality of journalism and political debate.

If we give each level a score of 0 to 6 and go through a media resource like a political speech, or a newspaper article which contains a criticism of a political action (for example) or a magazine or chat show in it's entirety as a source we can quickly create an average score for each media resource by summing the scores of 0-6 and dividing by the number of assertions scored. It can then be expressed as a percentage which give a quality score to any article, journalist, program, magazine or even channel.

In fact you could actually do this creating a crowd site to assess the quality of media assets and news sources and let discerning users chose the best. It would give an independent, quantitative view of quality.