3 ms·

The only specific example from that nypost article is about Fox News not being allowed as a source. Fox news has been found in court to be guilty of defamation

The only specific example from that nypost article is about Fox News not being allowed as a source. Fox news has been found in court to be guilty of defamation and has argued in court that it cannot be considered news, only entertainment. So do you want reality or reality TV on Wikipedia? Should we consider Ancient Aliens as a source?

Clamchop 1y ago
Fox News argued in court that their political commentary programming isn't news. They didn't argue that none of their programming is news.
- fnikacevic 1y ago
  They defamed Dominion so much on their "news" programs that they have to pay hundreds of millions of dollars. Great "news" source.
  - Clamchop 1y ago
    I don't disagree that Fox News is problematic for lots of reasons and I also have personal grievances with how they and similar outlets have affected several members of my family. That said, it's become folk knowledge that Fox News doesn't even think they're news, but that's simply a misunderstanding of the case. There's a tiny bit of irony that there are those who are patting themselves on the back for being above misinformation and getting this important detail wrong. I've seen the actual news that comes from them and while it's certainly biased rightward, particularly in what they choose to report on, it's not outrageously so.
- rsynnott 1y ago
  I mean, given how inclined they are to blur the lines, a certain amount of caution seems reasonable. They're a tabloid, essentially.
  - PathOfEclipse 1y ago
    It takes an incredible lack of awareness or intellectual honesty to hold Fox news to this standard, but not CNN, MSNBC, NBC, CBS, and ABC, or, if we include print media, the NYT, the Washington Post, the Guardian, Reuters, AP, Axios, LA Times, and the Atlantic.
PathOfEclipse 1y ago
You're not trying very hard to see a side that's different from yours, are you? You are responding to a comment saying "leftist != realistic", yet you seem to be pretending my intent was to say "here's proof Wikipedia is left-leaning." Neither of my links were given to "prove" bias, either, only to show that accusations of leftwing bias are accusations that Wikipedia is valuing propaganda over truth and objectivity. Anyways, to get off-topic from my original comment, here's some evidence for you to ignore: https://larrysanger.org/2021/06/wikipedia-is-more-one-sided-than-ever/ https://larrysanger.org/2021/06/wikipedia-is-more-one-sided-... https://media4.manhattan-institute.org/wp-content/uploads/is-wikipedia-politically-biased.pdf https://media4.manhattan-institute.org/wp-content/uploads/is... https://www.allsides.com/blog/wikipedia-biased https://www.allsides.com/blog/wikipedia-biased https://stophindudvesha.org/the-myth-of-wikipedias-neutrality-unmasking-its-leftist-bias/ https://stophindudvesha.org/the-myth-of-wikipedias-neutralit...
- fnikacevic 1y ago
  Look if you'd rather trust Fox News than Wikipedia feel free. None of those 4 sources are much convincing of your point.

Clamchop 1y ago

Fox News argued in court that their political commentary programming isn't news. They didn't argue that none of their programming is news.

fnikacevic 1y ago
They defamed Dominion so much on their "news" programs that they have to pay hundreds of millions of dollars. Great "news" source.
- Clamchop 1y ago
  I don't disagree that Fox News is problematic for lots of reasons and I also have personal grievances with how they and similar outlets have affected several members of my family. That said, it's become folk knowledge that Fox News doesn't even think they're news, but that's simply a misunderstanding of the case. There's a tiny bit of irony that there are those who are patting themselves on the back for being above misinformation and getting this important detail wrong. I've seen the actual news that comes from them and while it's certainly biased rightward, particularly in what they choose to report on, it's not outrageously so.
rsynnott 1y ago
I mean, given how inclined they are to blur the lines, a certain amount of caution seems reasonable. They're a tabloid, essentially.
- PathOfEclipse 1y ago
  It takes an incredible lack of awareness or intellectual honesty to hold Fox news to this standard, but not CNN, MSNBC, NBC, CBS, and ABC, or, if we include print media, the NYT, the Washington Post, the Guardian, Reuters, AP, Axios, LA Times, and the Atlantic.

PathOfEclipse 1y ago

You're not trying very hard to see a side that's different from yours, are you? You are responding to a comment saying "leftist != realistic", yet you seem to be pretending my intent was to say "here's proof Wikipedia is left-leaning." Neither of my links were given to "prove" bias, either, only to show that accusations of leftwing bias are accusations that Wikipedia is valuing propaganda over truth and objectivity. Anyways, to get off-topic from my original comment, here's some evidence for you to ignore: https://larrysanger.org/2021/06/wikipedia-is-more-one-sided-than-ever/ https://larrysanger.org/2021/06/wikipedia-is-more-one-sided-... https://media4.manhattan-institute.org/wp-content/uploads/is-wikipedia-politically-biased.pdf https://media4.manhattan-institute.org/wp-content/uploads/is... https://www.allsides.com/blog/wikipedia-biased https://www.allsides.com/blog/wikipedia-biased https://stophindudvesha.org/the-myth-of-wikipedias-neutrality-unmasking-its-leftist-bias/ https://stophindudvesha.org/the-myth-of-wikipedias-neutralit...

fnikacevic 1y ago
Look if you'd rather trust Fox News than Wikipedia feel free. None of those 4 sources are much convincing of your point.