STOP posting cites and links from non-sources!
- Thread starter Wilson23
- Start date
ll74
Your Best Friend
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2013
- Posts
- 79,444
Sources are valuable regardless of their biases. They give you an understanding of the perspective being posted about and allow you to read the same information for your own perspective.
That being said, it also offers the reader an opportunity to provide arguments and sources which disagree (which should also be posted for the readers) AND/OR corroborative information that may have differing interpretation.
Opinion/analysis are not factual and so posting them for that analysis is worthwhile most of the time.
That being said, it also offers the reader an opportunity to provide arguments and sources which disagree (which should also be posted for the readers) AND/OR corroborative information that may have differing interpretation.
Opinion/analysis are not factual and so posting them for that analysis is worthwhile most of the time.
Chernosoth
(◉‿◉)
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2021
- Posts
- 2,866
icanhelp1
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2019
- Posts
- 21,644
So what you really mean is don't post sites and links that disagree with your sites and links...GOT IT!
I mean don't post cites and links that are manifestly of ZERO VALUE. Mother Jones has value. Breitbart has not. There is no RW on the PB who can honestly contradict that.
icanhelp1
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2019
- Posts
- 21,644
One's value is subjective.
There are a lot of twisted viewpoints out there, it isn't hard to do a quick google and see if there's any value or whether it's a LOB.
Some people instantly dismiss a post because of the source linked, for that reason I don't post links to CNN (unless it's a photograph that illustrates a point) but find an alternative outlet.
Breitbart/Newsmax/GatewayPundit etc very rarely have genuine items that aren't covered extensively elsewhere and the reason for that is not 'because every other outlet is biased'. If there was a genuine story along the lines of Watergate any journalist would bust a gut to publish it.
Some people instantly dismiss a post because of the source linked, for that reason I don't post links to CNN (unless it's a photograph that illustrates a point) but find an alternative outlet.
Breitbart/Newsmax/GatewayPundit etc very rarely have genuine items that aren't covered extensively elsewhere and the reason for that is not 'because every other outlet is biased'. If there was a genuine story along the lines of Watergate any journalist would bust a gut to publish it.
It can be measured by CREDIBILITY. What you'll find on any of the sites I have named always turns out to be untrue, unless it is something copied from a mainstream source, and you might as well go straight to that source instead.
The best way to FIND OUT about a source's credibility is to go to Meda Bias/Fact Check, which is no liberal or leftist source itself. I have pointed that out here before, posted a thread solely about that, but no PB RW appears inclined to use that simple and obvious and RELIABLE method.
Similar threads
