6 ms·

How is not publishing an unverifiable story "censorship"? That's what we trust real news organizations to do. And saying that they should at least publish the

• pwned1 6y ago
  Unverifiable? Plenty of documentary evidence has been produced that could easily be verified. Simply ask the Bidens if it's true.
  • burtmacklin 6y ago
    Sure. By the way, when did you stop beating your wife?
    • pwned1 6y ago
      The cognitive dissonance in this thread is melting my brain.
• umvi 6y ago
  Perhaps the argument here is that the censorship is not being applied equally to both sides of the political spectrum. It's more than just this one example. It's basically all of the censorship efforts over the past few months aimed to slow or stop the spread of information (true or not) that might be damaging to Biden. Twitter and Facebook actively flag posts that "fact-checkers" deem to be misinformation. There was the recent high profile case of Hunter Biden stories being actively suppressed. Can you point to recent examples of misinformed anti-Trump articles being fact-checked by Twitter/Facebook/major news sources? As far as I can tell, those "bombshells" always spread unimpeded like wildfire.
• Pet_Ant 6y ago
  > it basically allows the peddlers of these unverifiable stories to dictate the news. The allegation itself is news, but it's important to label it as such when reporting it. The next step is to investigate it. If Trump says there are extraterrestrials living in Area 51 that's news regardless if you can verify it.
  • SamBam 6y ago
    That would be news because the President said that. If I, random nobody, show up with an allegation against Trump, using unverifiable "evidence," then that allegation is not newsworthy. And doubly-so if my whole job is to be a partisan hack trying to delver an October surprise.
• pageandrew 6y ago
  Real news organizations breathlessly reported unverified Trump Russia allegations.