5 ms·

They don't name names because it's probably scaremongering propaganda. Somebody wants to boost local oil consumption or other oils (other than olive) or somethi

They don't name names because it's probably scaremongering propaganda. Somebody wants to boost local oil consumption or other oils (other than olive) or something

azinman2 10y ago
If you don't name what you want people to get instead, how could this even be true? Mother jones has great reporting in general -- they're not an outfit that is a corporate ad extension.
- alvarosm 10y ago
  I'm not thinking of corporations. Local govt, etc. The study was made by -surprise- a university in the state where olive oil is produced. Btw about ads there's nothing more effective than a journalist that does it for free. There's another thread now in HN about marijuana's awesomeness. Don't people think for themselves anymore? do you all take a package of propaganda and ideology and blissfully swallow it without thinking twice?
  - stanmancan 10y ago
    The problem is that people should be able to trust the news, not that they don't think for themselves. I do plenty of "thinking", I just don't have any time to evaluate the authenticity of my olive oil. Think about how many decisions you need to make in a day; if you had to verify every article, product, or piece of information you ingest on a daily basis you wouldn't have time to do anything else. We have a huge problem where you really can't trust anything you hear or see; especially news. However, what's the solution? If I want to be up to date on world politics who do I trust? How do I know I can trust them? What about a new product? The manufacturer says it's healthy; an "article"says its not. Who do I trust? Is the article genuine or paid off by a competitor to boost their own sales? Do I have to do my own research and studies to find out the truth? That's hardly scalable.
    - CuriousSkeptic 10y ago
      OTOH a site like HN do produce this analysis for each link, by means of comments. It would be pretty interesting to have something like HN, perhaps a bit broader in topic selections, where the analysis was captured in a more structured manner and published for other services to reuse in various ways to aid the reader.
- downandout 10y ago
  >Mother jones has great reporting in general -- they're not an outfit that is a corporate ad extension. I'm sorry but are you kidding? Upon visiting this page I was presented with this ad that had no dismiss button: http://prntscr.com/c5bb9h http://prntscr.com/c5bb9h If you were a raging liberal, then I suppose you'd consider Mother Jones and its insistence on giving your email to the "Progressive Turnout Project" before reading their content to be "great reporting" (by the way, Mother Jones was paid for this - does that not qualify as a "corporate ad extension"?). But personally, I can't stand political propaganda sites that masquerade as journalism, and I especially can't stand any site that requires me to give my email to third parties before I can read their content. That's a nonstarter.
  - solipsism 10y ago
    No such thing as a journalistic organization without a platform. You're not surprising anyone. You should instead spend time showing that they're biased instead of just announcing this. Having a stance doesn't preclude good, unbiased journalism.
downandout 10y ago
Exactly right. Mother Jones is nothing more than a bought and paid for, left-leaning (to the point of tipping over) propaganda machine. Here are some of their awesomely impartial headlines: Donald Trump's Freefall Captured in Two Scathing Magazine Covers Republicans Say We Should Just Laugh Off Donald Trump’s Assassination "Joke." No. How Unpopular Is Trump? Clinton Is Courting Mormon Voters in Utah Now. (subtitle: This is what a landslide looks like.) The Trump Files: Donald's Recurring Sex Dreams Philadelphia Elections Official Destroys Conservative Conspiracy Theory that National Elections Are "Rigged" It keeps going. I wonder who "Mother" wants us to vote for?
- mesh 10y ago
  Pretty much every news publication / organization has some internal bias / lean (some more than others). That does not mean their reporting is inaccurate.
  - downandout 10y ago
    Some internal bias is one thing, if it is disclosed. Mother Jones, however, is a bastion of extreme leftist rhetoric that tries to pass itself off as a legitimate source of news. That is the part that is disturbing and very misleading to those that haven't been warned about or don't already know about the site. Maybe some sort of logo, even an arrow pointing to the left or right, or a Chrome plugin that turns the site blue or red for a few seconds when you first go to a page on it, would be good for these kinds of sites.

They don't name names because it's probably scaremongering propaganda. Somebody wants to boost local oil consumption or other oils (other than olive) or something

azinman2 10y ago

If you don't name what you want people to get instead, how could this even be true? Mother jones has great reporting in general -- they're not an outfit that is a corporate ad extension.

alvarosm 10y ago
I'm not thinking of corporations. Local govt, etc. The study was made by -surprise- a university in the state where olive oil is produced. Btw about ads there's nothing more effective than a journalist that does it for free. There's another thread now in HN about marijuana's awesomeness. Don't people think for themselves anymore? do you all take a package of propaganda and ideology and blissfully swallow it without thinking twice?
- stanmancan 10y ago
  The problem is that people should be able to trust the news, not that they don't think for themselves. I do plenty of "thinking", I just don't have any time to evaluate the authenticity of my olive oil. Think about how many decisions you need to make in a day; if you had to verify every article, product, or piece of information you ingest on a daily basis you wouldn't have time to do anything else. We have a huge problem where you really can't trust anything you hear or see; especially news. However, what's the solution? If I want to be up to date on world politics who do I trust? How do I know I can trust them? What about a new product? The manufacturer says it's healthy; an "article"says its not. Who do I trust? Is the article genuine or paid off by a competitor to boost their own sales? Do I have to do my own research and studies to find out the truth? That's hardly scalable.
  - CuriousSkeptic 10y ago
    OTOH a site like HN do produce this analysis for each link, by means of comments. It would be pretty interesting to have something like HN, perhaps a bit broader in topic selections, where the analysis was captured in a more structured manner and published for other services to reuse in various ways to aid the reader.
downandout 10y ago
>Mother jones has great reporting in general -- they're not an outfit that is a corporate ad extension. I'm sorry but are you kidding? Upon visiting this page I was presented with this ad that had no dismiss button: http://prntscr.com/c5bb9h http://prntscr.com/c5bb9h If you were a raging liberal, then I suppose you'd consider Mother Jones and its insistence on giving your email to the "Progressive Turnout Project" before reading their content to be "great reporting" (by the way, Mother Jones was paid for this - does that not qualify as a "corporate ad extension"?). But personally, I can't stand political propaganda sites that masquerade as journalism, and I especially can't stand any site that requires me to give my email to third parties before I can read their content. That's a nonstarter.
- solipsism 10y ago
  No such thing as a journalistic organization without a platform. You're not surprising anyone. You should instead spend time showing that they're biased instead of just announcing this. Having a stance doesn't preclude good, unbiased journalism.

downandout 10y ago

Exactly right. Mother Jones is nothing more than a bought and paid for, left-leaning (to the point of tipping over) propaganda machine. Here are some of their awesomely impartial headlines: Donald Trump's Freefall Captured in Two Scathing Magazine Covers Republicans Say We Should Just Laugh Off Donald Trump’s Assassination "Joke." No. How Unpopular Is Trump? Clinton Is Courting Mormon Voters in Utah Now. (subtitle: This is what a landslide looks like.) The Trump Files: Donald's Recurring Sex Dreams Philadelphia Elections Official Destroys Conservative Conspiracy Theory that National Elections Are "Rigged" It keeps going. I wonder who "Mother" wants us to vote for?

mesh 10y ago
Pretty much every news publication / organization has some internal bias / lean (some more than others). That does not mean their reporting is inaccurate.
- downandout 10y ago
  Some internal bias is one thing, if it is disclosed. Mother Jones, however, is a bastion of extreme leftist rhetoric that tries to pass itself off as a legitimate source of news. That is the part that is disturbing and very misleading to those that haven't been warned about or don't already know about the site. Maybe some sort of logo, even an arrow pointing to the left or right, or a Chrome plugin that turns the site blue or red for a few seconds when you first go to a page on it, would be good for these kinds of sites.