Mother Jones - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for Mother Jones:
> MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
> Wikipedia about this source
I don’t think that outsourcing our critical faculties is a good idea. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines that have been established and refined over the years to help us to assess what is a reliable source for what type of claim; our internal systems allow us to debate and discuss this to arrive at conclusions by reasoned argument and consensus-forming. Assessing the quality and suitability of sources for specific claims is amongst the most important things editors do on Wikipedia - sites like Mediabiasfactcheck might be a useful resource to help inform our discussions, but we shouldn’t attempt to create an environment where it’s sufficient to say ‘X’ is reliable because ‘Y’ says so.
The bot has no purpose. Either an article can be posted or not there’s no reason for the bot prompt. It just looks like thought policing using a bias checker which ‘coincidentally’ prefers what the current Democrats position is.
I can hardly imagine the bot stopping any fake news from being posted either.
Daily Beast - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for Daily Beast:
> MBFC: Left - Credibility: Medium - Factual Reporting: Mixed - United States of America
> Wikipedia about this source
Propublica - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for Propublica:
> MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
> Wikipedia about this source
USA Today - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for USA Today:
> MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Mostly Factual - United States of America
> Wikipedia about this source
I got as far as reading that the BBC often publish factual information that utilizes loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes) to favor liberal causes, that China Daily [the official mouthpiece of the Chinese Communist Party] is the most credible media source and that Most content on Wikipedia is well sourced with minimal bias before deciding I wouldn’t trust this site in the slightest. I totally oppose this proposal or any variant of it.
news
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.