Bit of a stretch, no?
-
The poster who submitted this has some sort of pro South China Morning Post (SCMP) agenda. So this post is likely some sort of attempt to normalize that newspaper.
-
I personally want Russia to lose their imperialist war and I want Trump to lose his election, but even with my biases this article is a huge stretch.
If you’re going to condemn a source, please provide evidence of cases where they have misreported in the past on similar issues.
For example, you could point to the New York Times’ article by Anat Schwartz as evidence that the New York Times has pro-Israel bias.
i am not commenting on the source. Just pointing out a strange pattern of behavior that I think should be noted. If look around on Lemmy you will see certain accounts that are weirdly into very specific sites.
If you look at the original posters account history you will see the same “very into a specific site” pattern.
Are you saying that people should be reading EVERY news site and then post what they see from any and all sites that make good content? How do you recommend they do that labor, use a news aggregator? Are you daft? This is how news aggregation works!!! Some individuals with real lives become deep consumers of a few specific news sources, select the best content they find and submit to aggregators like Lemmy. You and I benefit from 2 dozen of these people, each with only a handful of news sites they can review in their limited time and because there’s 2 dozen of them we get news from 30 - 50 news sites in our feed.
Really? Citing MBFC? What are you going to do next, ask an LLM what it thinks?
If you want to judge your media consumption off of some guy with no pictures online, no public interviews, and a “strong grasp of the scientific process” gained through (supposedly) a physiology degree and half a communications degree, be my guest. Just don’t launder it’s reliability here.
Ad Fontes reports SCMP’s reliability as 41.56, which is higher than the Washington Post (39.42) and on par with the New York Times (42.00), Al Jazeera (41.55), and USA Today (41.27). Ad Fontes ranks it lower than institutions like the BBC (44.72) or NPR (43.49) as well as newswire services like Reuters (45.62), AFP (47.15), and Associated Press (45.64).
Your other references are Wikipedia and Reddit. Are you sure you don’t want to cite what Google Gemini says as well?
Edit: for reference, Ad Fontes puts FOX News at a 35.49, MSNBC at a 34.39, and the New York Post at a 32.98.
The poster who submitted this has some sort of pro South China Morning Post (SCMP) agenda. So this post is likely some sort of attempt to normalize that newspaper.
Lmfao
People can look at your post history and judge for themselves.
I see you’re new to news outlets.
-
