4 ms·

Could you link to a couple of examples? I am not interested enough to go searching. I did find an anti-vaxxer piece on the frontpage, which did not exactly ins

Could you link to a couple of examples? I am not interested enough to go searching. I did find an anti-vaxxer piece on the frontpage, which did not exactly inspire trust: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-04-28/why-our-children-should-hate-us-read-lance-simmens-article-banned-huffington-post http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-04-28/why-our-children-sh...

tomp 11y ago
> Some very, very powerful and influential people are terrified of it and are doing everything they can to make sure it never sees the light of day. Which makes me infinitely more curious. Which is quite solid logic - why would "they" want to ban something unless they're afraid of it?
- pjc50 11y ago
  Maybe they're afraid of it because it's genuinely misleading and dangerous to public health? Just because innocent people are sometimes harassed by the authorities does not mean you can use harrasment by authorities as evidence that someone's actually in the right.
tcoppi 11y ago
They post things like this all the time. I would take it not as them editorially advocating the position, but rather getting information otherwise censored by other media out there. Sometimes the information is not reported for good reason, such as this. You need a very good BS and relevancy filter to find the few nuggets of gold that are put out maybe a few times a year by ZH.
- themartorana 11y ago
  An "even a broken clock is right twice a day" method of viewing a content publication is a funny way of explaining away dangerous "journalism" for a couple of stuck clock hands.
  - tcoppi 11y ago
    I prefer to think of it as clock hands that move in a specific direction, one that is mostly uncorrelated with the direction everyone else's clock hands move, but sometimes it reaches the destination everyone else arrives at first, sometimes it is just trolling you.
throwanem 11y ago
If your framework is trust rather than critical analysis, you're going to get suckered no matter what news media you choose to consume.

tomp 11y ago

> Some very, very powerful and influential people are terrified of it and are doing everything they can to make sure it never sees the light of day. Which makes me infinitely more curious. Which is quite solid logic - why would "they" want to ban something unless they're afraid of it?

pjc50 11y ago
Maybe they're afraid of it because it's genuinely misleading and dangerous to public health? Just because innocent people are sometimes harassed by the authorities does not mean you can use harrasment by authorities as evidence that someone's actually in the right.

tcoppi 11y ago

They post things like this all the time. I would take it not as them editorially advocating the position, but rather getting information otherwise censored by other media out there. Sometimes the information is not reported for good reason, such as this. You need a very good BS and relevancy filter to find the few nuggets of gold that are put out maybe a few times a year by ZH.

themartorana 11y ago
An "even a broken clock is right twice a day" method of viewing a content publication is a funny way of explaining away dangerous "journalism" for a couple of stuck clock hands.
- tcoppi 11y ago
  I prefer to think of it as clock hands that move in a specific direction, one that is mostly uncorrelated with the direction everyone else's clock hands move, but sometimes it reaches the destination everyone else arrives at first, sometimes it is just trolling you.

throwanem 11y ago

If your framework is trust rather than critical analysis, you're going to get suckered no matter what news media you choose to consume.