4 ms·
The weirdest part is this leads to frequent items where the Op-Ed page makes factual claims that are directly contradicted by the news section in the same issue
by simplicio 6y ago
The weirdest part is this leads to frequent items where the Op-Ed page makes factual claims that are directly contradicted by the news section in the same issue.
- N1H1L 6y agoThe recent opinion section, no less by the Editorial Board, at WSJ claimed that focusing on renewable energy sources led to the Texas power cuts [1]. While the paper, on the same day itself, reported the opposite [2]. Links: 1) https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-deep-green-freeze-11613411002#comments_sector https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-deep-green-freeze-11613411002... 2) https://www.wsj.com/articles/texas-freeze-power-grid-failure-electricity-market-incentives-11613777856 https://www.wsj.com/articles/texas-freeze-power-grid-failure...
- geoduck14 6y agoThis isn't particularly unusual. The opinion section is a fine place for dissenting views. Consider a news article covering the abuse of elderly in a nursing home, with an opinion piece defending (or explaining, or whatever) the nursing home - this could be good.
- simplicio 6y agoThere's a difference between explaining and defending the abuse the news-side reported, and saying that the abuse never happened and the news side is wrong/lying/etc.