3 ms·
>What's really insidious is that they mix well-sourced, real news with absolute trash, so if you're just looking at the headlines it's not unreasonable to think
by sleepysysadmin 8y ago
>What's really insidious is that they mix well-sourced, real news with absolute trash, so if you're just looking at the headlines it's not unreasonable to think that they're all real. That is, until you click on one of the trash articles and find that the "source" is a blog that sources another blog, which sources yet another blog and so on.
So like the rest of the news?
The point of news is to have a spectrum and you read them and determine the truth for yourself.
None of the points you make validate a ban.
- dev_dull 8y agoI wonder is the GP has been paying attention in MSM these days. I’ve read “bombshell” after “bombshell” of breaking news regarding the current administration, with nearly everything turning out to be a dud. No apologies and no retractions.
- jamespo 8y ago> So like the rest of the news? mmm... fake equivalence
- sleepysysadmin 8y ago>mmm... fake equivalence Could you provide me some links showing Zero hedge is different? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_equivalence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_equivalence
- jamespo 8y agoYou're the one that claims the rest of "the news" has articles with sources solely from random blogs... come up with some examples yourself.