Data is great, it lets you make your own conclusions. There still remains an element of trust though, in the provider of the data. It's certainly a step above bloat-filled news articles though.
Agreed. And I like the concept as well, but (even in just briefly poking around the few topics on the site) I also felt a lack of trust. This has less to do with anything particular to the site and is more so related to the fact that with pure data, and with little-to-no context, it is impossible to discern any potential biases that one could otherwise pick-up on. Furthermore there is no information on how data is selected (two guys sitting in a room copying Wikipedia? I’m not saying that’s the case here, but how would one know? And even if it were from absolutely reputable sources, any human intervention in selecting and deciding which data to include/not include makes it hard to claim real objectivity).
I think an interesting (though much harder to develop) implementation of this concept would be to have it powered by a complex algorithm that combs the web for sources and pulls consistent data from them. Such a system would essentially verify data accuracy through identifying consistency across a massive number of sources and prevent any selection bias. Just a thought..
