Originally posted by socool8520
Same rating, same validity I always say.
Can be, but not always, you have to look a bit beyond the rating. I explained it to someone else here before:
Originally posted by Robtard
Explained to you several times. All "mixed" ratings are not equal. You have to take the whole description into account. As it stands, CNN is not rated as a conspiracy site or pseudoscience. ZeroHedge is.Let me explain with nuts. Lets say one bowl is composed of 60% almonds, 20% walnuts and 20% cashews, other bowl is 20% almonds, 20% walnuts, 20% cashews and 40% low quality nigh-tasteless filler peanuts. Saying "both bowls are mixed" while technically correct, it's really not the full story when looking closely at the contents 🙂
YW
/nuts
Originally posted by socool8520
Isn't CNN pretty far on the left?
trouble with all network news is they also factor in the TV news, and only retards watch the news on tv/streaming
Overall, we rate CNN left biased based on editorial positions that consistently favors the left, while straight news reporting falls left-center through bias by omission. We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to several failed fact checks by TV hosts. However, news reporting on the website tends to be properly sourced with minimal failed fact checks
Originally posted by socool8520
Isn't CNN pretty far on the left?
Just to be clear
His source's rating from the fact checking agency he picked
Overall, we rate The Washington Post Left-Center biased based on editorial positions that moderately favors the left and factually High due to the use of proper sources and a reasonable fact check record. (5/18/2016) Updated (M. Huitsing 3/16/2020)
Mine, from the same source
Overall, we rate the Albuquerque Journal Right-Center Biased based on an editorial board that consistently favors the right and High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing and a clean fact check record. (10/2/2016) Updated (D. Van Zandt 3/13/2019)
Originally posted by Silent MasterI. Going to state again the fact check wasn't the point I was making... rihtist militia, rightist tow, rightist newspaper... shooting was and the shooter in my opinion will be punished. The rightist gaslighting never stops and this is what destroys discourse, who ta
Just to be clearHis source's rating from the fact checking agency he picked
Mine, from the same source
Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
I. Going to state again the fact check wasn't the point I was making... rihtist militia, rightist tow, rightist newspaper... shooting was and the shooter in my opinion will be punished. The rightist gaslighting never stops and this is what destroys discourse, who ta
This is pretty hard to follow.
Originally posted by Bashar Teg
trouble with all network news is they also factor in the TV news, and only retards watch the news on tv/streamingOverall, we rate CNN left biased based on editorial positions that consistently favors the left, while [b]straight news reporting falls left-center through bias by omission
. We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to several failed fact checks by TV hosts. However, news reporting on the website tends to be properly sourced with minimal failed fact checks
Favoring the left and failing to deliver the whole story is still messed up though.
Originally posted by socool8520
Favoring the left and failing to deliver the whole story is still messed up though.
their website reporting is accurate, which applies to debate sources. tv bobbleheads and biased editorial pieces are what damages their rating. besides npr I can't think of a single news source that doesn't pull omission stunts
Going to state again the fact check wasn't the point I was making... rihtist militia, rightist tow, rightist newspaper... shooting was and the shooter in my opinion will be punished. The rightist gaslighting never stops and this is what destroys discourse, who takes a gun to a demo. And that's me signing off nanoo nanoo 🙂
Gaslight away my rightist chums. 😛
Originally posted by Bashar Teg
their website reporting is accurate, which applies to debate sources. tv bobbleheads and biased editorial pieces are what damages their rating. besides npr I can't think of a single news source that doesn't pull omission stunts
I agree, all of them do which is why I think it's splitting hairs to nitpick sources for the most part unless it's ridiculous. Outside of posting a source from both sides and only accepting what both sides agree on.
Originally posted by socool8520
I agree, all of them do which is why I think it's splitting hairs to nitpick sources for the most part unless it's ridiculous. Outside of posting a source from both sides and only accepting what both sides agree on.
we have specific members which only post links to zero hedge and the blaze, which are known for flatout fabrications, so it's not fair to engage in false equalization. CNN web articles, as shown, are typically factually accurate; while activist blog news is mostly hot steaming dogshit.