Good idea in theory, but needs to be applied equally. I've seen just as much bullshit on Gizmodo (and sister sites) and BuzzFeed as I have on FoxNews, and other

Good idea in theory, but needs to be applied equally. I've seen just as much bullshit on Gizmodo (and sister sites) and BuzzFeed as I have on FoxNews, and other like sites. It does seem a bit weird that they are only trialing it on right leaning sources. Coupled with the stuff the Damore lawsuit is bringing out, it makes me take a second look. There also needs to be a distinction between reporting, and editorials. Every side is guilty of mixing in editorials masquerading as reporting along side reporting. It's extremely hard to tell the two apart. WashingtonPost; I need to look in the URL to see which category the content falls under. I think an effective method would having something along the lines of the following for each site: - This is a reliable source - This is generally a reliable source - This is sometimes reliable source - This is not generally a reliable source - This is not a reliable source - This is satire - This is opinion