3 ms·
>my understanding is the concern is around them promoting conspiracy theories without evidence not their political alignment. That might be their justification
by aeternum 1y ago
>my understanding is the concern is around them promoting conspiracy theories without evidence not their political alignment.
That might be their justification but is it actually true?
Specifically: Do you believe that every major right-wing paper promotes conspiracy theories while every major left-wing paper does not?
- bawolff 1y agoI would disagree with your premise that every major right wing paper is listed. For example fox news and the Washington Examiner are considered right wing and are not listed as a deprecated source. Similarly there are left wing sources on the deprecated list like the grayzone or Occupy Democrats. (Arguably those are rather fringe) Certainly the epoch times has been widely criticized for being factually inaccurate in ways the new york times has not been. I also don't particularly think the new york times is equivalent to the epoch times in terms of reputation.
- dlubarov 1y agoFox News was deemed "generally unreliable" for politics and science, which in practice means that it's unusable in most cases, not so different from deprecated. I also find it interesting that Al-Manar (essentially Hezbollah's media office) has a slightly better status than, say, Daily Mail. See also (Wikipedia cofounder) Larry Sanger's critique of Wikipedia' source bias - https://larrysanger.org/2021/06/wikipedia-is-more-one-sided-than-ever/ https://larrysanger.org/2021/06/wikipedia-is-more-one-sided-...