3 ms·
This would fall under the logical fallacy of attacking the character of the outlet, and not actually criticising the content. The content of the video that was
by Prickle 3y ago
This would fall under the logical fallacy of attacking the character of the outlet, and not actually criticising the content.
The content of the video that was linked, can be described as "in theory the universe was xyz so abc could have been a thing". Also known as non-serious entertainment.
Your link is irrelevant in this conversation, as the criticisms involved are entirely political. If the linked video was related to renewables, nuclear energy, etc then it might have been relevant.
- Minor49er 3y agoIn other words, it's okay to give positive attention to entities who have subverted their audiences in the past, so long as what they're currently saying is warm and fuzzy? Quite an interesting, yet dangerous stance
- Prickle 3y agoVice versa actually. The reputation and/or background of a source should not affect the criticism of the content. If the content of an article or video is good, the reputation of the source is not that relevant. Vice versa again, a outlet having a good reputation should not prevent you from judging a bad article as bad.
- Minor49er 3y agoThis is a recipe for enabling scammers