Skip Navigation

  • Giving a garbo source the benefit of the doubt on an article-by-article basis just muddies the waters and gives an air of undeserved legitimacy to other things they publish.

    Credibility and trust are built over time; throwing out a "look, THIS article is okay" every so often does not make them a credible source.

    If the facts are solid, then there should be at least one other reputable source reporting on them. If only a sensationalist rag is covering it, maybe ask why that is.

    I notice you aren't disputing the facts here, just the source.

    This is the same argument I've seen used by people trying to legitimize Fox News and RT, BTW.

  • Ok, let's flip that around then. Does this make it any better?

    Overall, we rate Mondoweiss as Left Biased and Questionable due to the blending of opinion with news, the promotion of pro-zionist and anti-Palestinian propaganda, occasional reliance on poor sources, and hate group designation by third-party pro-Palestinian advocates.

    Trick question: it does not. Reputable outlets do not put their thumb on the scale in either direction. Just because you agree with their bias does not make them credible.

  • It's not what you're posting but where you're posting it from and their track record. Post it from a less biased, less sensationalized, more reputable source and I would guess those complaints will largely go away.

    Nobody complains when I post one of thousands of fact checks

    Those have all been from credible sources.

  • Put them in the body. I'll downvote every archive link used the post url because it obfuscates the source.

  • Yes, those are called "Opinions / Editorials / Letters to the Editor" et al. Both News and WorldNews have rules against opinion articles as well.

  • Are we? I feel like that's a pretty necessary "/s" considering the mental gymnastics I've heard IRL and on Lemmy. If they edit their comment to add that very necessary qualifier, I'll happily throw 'em an upvote. As-is, I genuinely have no idea.

  • And idiotic absolutism is why we're in this mess.

    Good job!

    Edit: If you meant the /s on your comment, my bad. There's just so many insane takes going around, I kind of need that to differentiate.

  • Hi, Dot/Joker/000:

    You gonna nuke this account and all conversations attached to the posts, too?

  • Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

    Rules:

    1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

    Is Xhitter an article? Is this unsubstantiated image?

    No and no.

    Please familiarize yourself with the rules OP.

  • A sad two sentence story...of my life lol

  • Does anyone want to take over the new AskUSA@discuss.online community to allow for more serious discussions?

    Jump
  • I'd be willing to moderate it from my Lemmy World account (this one), but I do not want to be "top mod". Mostly I'm willing to help keep trolls and rif-raff at bay and enforce the rules. Rules look okay to me, but I guess they can be fine-tuned as the need arises?

  • Sure. Would be willing to at least help with the riff-raff. My main alt is @ptz@dubvee.org

  • It would make a difference is all I'm saying.

    Perfect and better are not mutually exclusive concepts.

  • If people would at least just check the community they're posting to, it would help immensely.

    Added emphasis to previous statement.

  • I thought that would be different here, but sadly is not. lol

  • If people would at least just check the community they're posting to, it would help immensely.

  • I've seen this site get spammed in the past, but it's been a few months. Guess they're at it again.

    That whole site is an unholy mixture of religion, conspiracy, and Elon Musk. It's bonkers.

    Basically if you see tiblur [dot] com, you can pretty much just report it as spam.

  • Rule 3 seems to be very unenforced lately 😠