Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

WexfordHo t1_ixzx748 wrote

That’s nice. Here’s what I care about.

> These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward liberal causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage liberal causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy.

−11

xeroxzero t1_ixzykwt wrote

So you care more about political bias over factual accuracy. Gotcha.

9

WexfordHo t1_ixzzk6k wrote

I care about sources of information which aren’t simply propaganda outlets which “publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information…”

You should too.

−14

jeffinRTP t1_iy01a1z wrote

How could it be missleading if factual? It's much easier to disregard the political leaning knowing that what is reported is factually correct.

A factual search reveals they have not failed a fact check.

10

WexfordHo t1_iy01mwy wrote

The only facts in the entire piece are that this drone exists, and who makes it. The rest of the page is just speculation, quoting another paper, and emotive language. As a piece regarding a bit of technology any discussion of that tech is notably absent.

So how could it mislead? Well how do right wingers in the US mislead without lying? Talk about HRT for example, offer a single ‘fact’ about what it is, then spend the rest of the time conjuring visions of horror about how it might be abused.

0