Now do you get why I was stating the argument is really really dumb and that A CITATION IS NOT NEEDED!
Either you haven't read the article or are being disingenuous about it
"Why do these stories keep showing up? Well, they’re not exactly the same stories. These sites are so shitty and unpopular that the stories would drop off almost immediately if left to their own devices. So the sites must continually update/rewrite/tweak/republish again and again so the Google algorithm thinks they’re new. (Google also prioritizes newness.)
And look: James Clapper’s testimony was weeks ago, yet these articles read like they’re breaking a new story. And they’re only a few hours old. The Post and the Times, however, aren’t spending their resources on this stuff. They have responsibilities to keep up with the real news. And so do we, as citizens. But these psycho-dipshit crawlspaces don’t have that burden, and they’re betting you don’t want it, either."