4 ms·

That's the Daily Mail, a newspaper that supported Hitler during the 1930s, and today is not accepted as a source in Wikipedia due to "the Daily Mail’s reputatio

by rmc 9y ago

That's the Daily Mail, a newspaper that supported Hitler during the 1930s, and today is not accepted as a source in Wikipedia due to "the Daily Mail’s reputation for poor fact checking, sensationalism and flat-out fabrication"¹. So you'll forgive me if I'm skeptical. Secondly there is nothing in that article about neo-Nazism, so I don't know why you brought it up? I'm talking about neo-Nazi sites, not general racism/etc. --- ¹ https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/feb/08/wikipedia-bans-daily-mail-as-unreliable-source-for-website https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/feb/08/wikipedia...

cm2187 9y ago
If reading the daily mail offends you, there was a long column in the FT last week end about this phenomenon [1] but you will find references in various newspapers [2] [3] (and dozens others if you google it). [1] https://www.ft.com/content/902581a0-99ff-11e7-b83c-9588e51488a0 https://www.ft.com/content/902581a0-99ff-11e7-b83c-9588e5148... [2]https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/04/education/edlife/internet-trolls-social-media-professors.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/04/education/edlife/internet... [3] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/student-protestors-and-their-faculty-allies-at-the_us_59bebbc4e4b06b71800c3a9f http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/student-protestors-and-t...
- rmc 9y ago
  > If reading the daily mail offends you It doesn't offend me. It's just not a reliable source. And those links don't address my second point. There is no reference to neo-Nazism. I'm suggesting neo-Nazi website be taken offline/