Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

chugga_fan t1_jaw0yo2 wrote

Reply to comment by snozzberrypatch in [OC] Wikipedia Edits by Day, 2001–2010 by ptgorman

> Lmao you're putting MSNBC and HuffPost in the same category as OANN?

MSNBC is occasionally good.

Huffington post at best is a glorified opinion piece.

Get your head out of the sand and fucking see the world for what it is.

"I don't have my head in the sand" - Man who says the Huffington Post is accurate reporting.

I do love how you don't even bother with the fact that I mention the Gaurdian, which is OBJECTIVELY a worse version of the Huffington Post.

0

snozzberrypatch t1_jaw33q4 wrote

Keep watching OANN dude. The ultimate source for all of your confirmation bias needs.

You can mention all the news sources you want, the fact is there is nothing on the left that is even remotely equivalent to something like OANN, at least not that I'm aware of, or if it does exist it's on the extreme fringe and doesn't attract a lot of viewers. You people treat OANN like it's fuckin Reuters. Pretty sad.

2

chugga_fan t1_jaw3t45 wrote

> Keep watching OANN dude.

I don't watch news media because it's all garbage takes from CNN and Fox News to The Gaurdian and OANN.

All of it's trash yellow journalism disguised as information on the ground.

Find a local reliable outlet and read the print section occasionally and take it with a fucking grain of salt.

> Thinking I give a flying fuck about OANN

I use them as the case of being an extreme right-wing bias, why the FUCK do you think I think it's neutral btw? Why the hell are the only people arguing about this with me unable to parse an english sentence?

0