2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumIf your only source for negative news about Hillary Clinton is Washington Times,
please don't post it here on DU. That is not a reliable source. If you can't find a better source, there's no point in posting it at all. Right-wing sources alone are not enough. We don't need to see Washington Times stories here that are negative about our candidate.
Thanks!
Squinch
(50,949 posts)You aren't letting me trash Hillary! You neo-liberals are violating my first amendment rights! No one can say anything here anymore!
... and so on...
How's my impersonation?
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)while pimping stuff from the Moonie Times and Breitbart
Kingofalldems
(38,454 posts)MineralMan
(146,288 posts)I just visited another website, vaguely related to DU, and discovered that it considers Alex Jones sites and 4chan.org to be sources worth posting from. It's full of original posts sourced from sites no self-respecting DUer would ever use as sources.
People at that site are taking such useless websites seriously. How could anyone take a site seriously that is full of material from wackadoo sources?
DU should be a website where people post from reliable, trusted sources that do not have a right wing or other weird agenda. That's how I feel, anyhow.
I see what you did there.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)Who knew?
MineralMan
(146,288 posts)I'd alert on posts that are sourced there, but too many DUers are not aware of its heavily biased approach. Such alerts consistently fail to get posts with that lousy excuse for a news source as the link.
workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)with just a name.
The Moonie Times is a right wing cult organ but the Washington Times sound like a proper newspaper.
MineralMan
(146,288 posts)There are tons of websites with names that sound like actual news publications, even though they are little more than personal blogs by someone who is posting nonsense.
The same thing applies to nutcase advocacy websites that pretend to be scientific publications. A site named The International Journal of Nutrition, for example, might well be a website created by some food faddist. It sounds like a scientific journal's title, but the content may be bullshit.
The Internet is a wonderful thing, since anyone can publish their thinking without spending money or making it past an editorial board. Still, it's up to us, as individuals, to assess Internet sources before relying on them. In many ways, the Internet is a mixed blessing. While it makes finding information incredibly easy, it also makes disseminating misinformation just as easy.
Critical thinking is more needed today than ever before. It must be applied to every new source we encounter, or we risk quoting nonsense as though it were truth.
Billie Salmon head is the editor of that fine paper, fish wrapper. Kiltoooon hater from way back.