2 ms·
I don't think that's true at all. It's certainly different, but "higher" is quite a stretch. And this is a good example. Politically-motivated voting to suppres
by wpietri 5y ago
I don't think that's true at all. It's certainly different, but "higher" is quite a stretch. And this is a good example. Politically-motivated voting to suppress basic facts critical of an article source is not "higher" in any sense.
- lostmsu 5y agoWhy do you believe voting was political as opposed to the reasoning I mentioned: that bringing up political orientation of the source is a low quality data point?
- wpietri 5y agoIt did not bring up political orientation of the source. You can go back and read the comment yourself. It pointed out that the article only sought comment from people with a conflict of interest. That's bad journalistic practice no matter one's politics. It's also is a) true, and b) an indication that the political orientation of the source is driving the bad journalism. I'm confident it the voting was political because I didn't just fall off the turnip truck. It's my long experience here that unless criticism of the US right is phrased in very particular ways it will get a lot of reflex downvoting.