3 ms·
Again, no examples. Why? I feel like your conviction that breitbart is as good as any other news source (or as bad, whatever way you look at it) is not grounde
by orf 8y ago
Again, no examples. Why?
I feel like your conviction that breitbart is as good as any other news source (or as bad, whatever way you look at it) is not grounded in reality if you call those minor mistskes.
Not only is the headline misleading but the contents as well, designed to stoke certain people and confirm their biases.
From reading that article, the contents instead of just the headline, you would get they are stopping accepting all the thousands and millions EU immigrants flooding into their borders because they do not contribute.
Not one bit of that is true.
Find me something on CNN as patently false and misleading as that, on their front page right now please. Thanks!
- leereeves 8y agoWhat's patently false and misleading here is your characterization of the article. > From reading that article, the contents instead of just the headline, you would get they are stopping accepting all the thousands and millions EU immigrants flooding into their borders because they do not contribute. Nowhere in that article did Breitbart say millions of EU immigrants are flooding into Denmark. And if I give a charitable interpretation to your nitpick that Breitbart altered the quote, removing women from "do not contribute", it could apply to the headline, but not the article. Breitbart quoted the full statement in the second paragraph.