Do you still consider it possible that gw is capable of independent thought? lol Is he not a mere tool?
Democrats are hypocrites
- Thread starter Maverick74
- Start date
Somehow you don't understand the difference between a website which is pure Tin Foil Hat Quackery and one is rated as "Mixed" in regards to reporting quality.
There is a tremendous gap between the quality of these two sources.
We should also note that many sources cited constantly by the right in this forum such as the New York Post, Fox News and Washington Examiner are listed as "Mixed" in reporting quality.
What I understand is that you are a hypocrite. Class A, buddy. Even if "mixed" meant 50% of the time, your 38 pages of posts with rawstory articles means half are bullshit. In fairness, that is a better batting average than you, yourself. So by posting rawstory, you're actually increasing your truthiness somewhat. So there's that.
Mixed does not mean 50% -- maybe you need to go look up the definition of a Mixed rating on the Media Bias / Fact Check website.
Yet you have nothing to say about the New York Post, Fox News and Washington Examiner all being listed as "Mixed" in reporting quality. Does this mean 50% of the articles posted here from these sources are bullshiat.
What % is mixed? Lets calc how many bullshit posts you've created, then.
As for Fox or the Post, I don't care about any of them. I don't even care about mediabiasfactcheck. The only mentions I have ever had of the site were laughing at YOU who uses them when convenient, and ignores or justifies using "flawed" sites otherwise.
I have no position on the subject. You, as always, end up with your foot in your mouth because you're a clown. You spam so much, that you don't remember when you're at odds with what you've said. Left or Right, posters on this site have always called you out on it.
The fact that we're discussing this in a thread about hypocrites makes it even MORE hilarious!
Yet the sources you use -- which primary consist of Covid-deniers on social media -- can only be described as complete Tin Foil Hat Quackery.
You really should use proper mainstream sources if you want anyone to take your comedy act seriously.
So now you're trying to make this about sources I post, when what we're talking about is you trying to use a fact checker to call someone out, and then always using a site your fact checker refers to as not newsworthy (and hyper partisan).
If you want to run away from the mediabiasfactcheck discussion, we can move to the COVID fact check thread which is even MORE of a laugh-riot.
Yet -- the entire definition of Mixed is that the reporting source is mainstream and newsworthy -- but they need to do better job in sourcing the support for their content -- and that they have failed a number of fact checks over the previous months.
Really? Is that what they mean by "Mixed"? Hahaha...you're such a tool. And predictable. Its almost like I know what you're going to say before you type it.
Because this is what they actually write about Rawstory:
- Overall, we rate Raw Story Left Biased based on story selection that favors the left and Mixed for factual reporting due to half-true, false, and unproven claims, as well as the promotion of mild pseudoscience misinformation.
LOL
Overall we rate the New York Post on the far end of Right-Center Biased due to story selection that typically favors the Right and Mixed (borderline questionable) for factual reporting based on several failed fact checks.
We rate Fox News strongly Right-Biased due to editorial positions and story selection that favors the right. We also rate them Mixed factually and borderline Questionable based on poor sourcing and the spreading of conspiracy theories.
Overall, we rate the Washington Examiner Right Biased based on editorial positions that almost exclusively favor the right and Mixed for factual reporting due to several failed fact checks.