4 ms·

I often see this defence of, "it's up to the reader to decide!" pop up in circumstances like this. The vast majority of the time it's used to justify either ly

I often see this defence of, "it's up to the reader to decide!" pop up in circumstances like this. The vast majority of the time it's used to justify either lying or repeating lies. What exactly is the use of a website apparently designed to give equal weight to lies and facts? How does that benefit anyone? The world doesn't need yet another journalism-related resource that repeats what other people say instead of attempting to actually find the truth. But doing the former is massively cheaper and easier than the latter.

unsignedint 1y ago
Perhaps it’s most useful as a way to avoid getting trapped in a filter bubble. If you prefer to stay within the comfort zone of your favorite news outlet, there’s nothing stopping you—and in that case, you probably won’t get much value from services like Ground News. Personally, I find it helpful to see what people outside my usual information sphere are being exposed to—not just to understand why others may think the way they do, but also to better recognize how that contrast influences the coverage I choose to consume.