World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
welp guess they're not getting my donation this year
edit: this source looked very sus to me so I had to look up a more reliable one. Seems more legit at the MSN version.
Personally i wait and see how the institution responds and make my assessment then. Cool heads and all that.
There is a tendancy on the left to become reactionary - spot one bad actor and 'throw the baby out with the bathwater' by personally blacklisting a whole attached group.
While that might feel good and have some short term positive feedback with upvotes on a social post, its also great for the right wing too. They just have to highlight a single problematic incident and watch as their enemy platform/org/service is abandoned by leftist puritans. The same does not happen for right wing groups, as their users are far less likely to baulk over one or two issues, so they don't even need to worry about this attack method being turned inward - no blowback.
Yeah I definitely want to see how they respond
Also worth noting that Wikipedia and Archive.org are under constant attack by right wing extremists.
So it's way more likely that's what's going on.
Also most of these smear stories from troll farms get follow up comments in the threads they get posted in similar to this one.
yeahhh, on second glance... OP's username leans towards trolling
A former employee is making allegations. Whether they are accurate or truthful was not discussed in either article. What do you know about the merits of this suit other than what you read about the plaintiff's filing?
It's a copy of the exact same article by the exact same author.
Why would you discourage using the original source?
And why do you find a copied article more legit? Especially considering it doesn't have the info about the author the original has.
msn has that name recognition. never heard of the other people.
But MSN is not a source, it's just collecting things from other places, there is zero quality assurance from being on MSN.
On the original source you can read about the author. And the site seem pretty legit to me.
I wouldn't say MSN isn't a source but I see what you mean about the author info at the bottom. Looks like I also missed the part at the top of the MSN link that said it was originally posted at TheDesk, so I guess it is legit. I'd only searched up other sources just to cross-check the original to see if more than one outlet was talking about it and check its validity, so either way yeah it checks out.
Searching other sources is absolutely a great idea, also because this doesn't sound like how Wikipedia would normally behave.
But considering MSN is a copy of the original, I wouldn't consider it another source in this case.
But that's probably because you rushed it a bit. If you had found a true 2nd source, that would have been stellar.
Well, we all know you’re anti-lgbt, regardless of the alleged incident.
Oh boy, you have no idea how moronic that comment is. You can browse my entire history, and I've been posting here daily for 2 years. And I guarantee you won't be able to find a single anti LGBT comment made by me.
If your comment wasn't so laughably stupid, I'd find it offensive.
You’re just upset you got busted, and someone else agreed. So, not in my head sweetie.
We all know you didn't think before you typed, regardless of the incident. Anyone can make allegations, we have to wait to find out if they are true, that's the burden of civilization. Or at least how it's supposed to work.
They’ve made anti-lgbt comments before. I thought about how they aren’t commenting on this for any other reason.
I gave them a quick scroll through. I didn't see anything overtly anti-lgbt. Have any sources?
It’s subtle, but there.
https://lemmings.world/comment/15744191
It's subtle because it's in your head.
Oh boy:
This was your own comment I responded to, So clearly you think it's important to your position yourself.
You used it in a couple of comments as you thought it was somehow a defense for your position.
That was your response, and notice how that comment ended the discussion. Because it was too stupid to respond to.
I don't care if you are gay or not, but clearly it's an issue to you.
Oof, that's a comment in terrible taste.
Why? This is what I responded to, look at the context. He also insinuated in earlier comments that him being in a same sex marriage somehow supported his argument? Arguing about living in a state that allow same sex marriage was a "feature" of USA, where the obvious problem is the states that don't.
And please notice that that comment ended the discussion. Because it was so stupid I didn't care to respond to that.
I don't care if people are gay or not, but clearly it's an issue to u/blakenong.
IDK why he interpreted it as an anti gay comment, when clearly by his own admission, it was a strong influence on him.
Look at you tripping all over yourself trying to defend your sensitive white heterosexual male feelings. The problem with people like you is that you are incapable of understanding anything outside of yourself because you’ve never had to face any real challenges in life. Then you go off and mock other people as if you’re somehow superior because of what you were born with but never earned.
And you know this how?
How did I mock you? You mentioned yourself it was a factor in your understanding of society. I just tried to show you that it might not work quite the way you think.
What was I born with? I was born with just about the most basic privileges everybody in Denmark was born with at the time. As far as I remember our debate started with exactly the fact that I consider USA a shitty country, because those privileges don't exist in USA. And for some reason you defended USA?
Lucky for you, that you are not stuck in one of the worst states, maybe you would see things differently if you were.
It started because you don’t understand how state vs federal government works, and that you assume every place in the US is the same because all you do is drink up the media like it’s the only facts that exist. Then you shit all over innocent people and think you’re the good guy.
Since we are shitting, maybe if your mind wasn’t so irreparably flawed you wouldn’t be getting off on the misfortunes of others so frequently.
Goodbye
That was your claim, but I already explained that actually I do. Here we even learn about American democracy in public school, so don't project your own ignorance onto me.
But you don’t. Or you wouldn’t have thought the DMV in Florida represents the entire country. You keep saying you know, but everything out of your mouth suggests you have minimal knowledge. The kind of minimal knowledge that comes from a chapter of a book in public school.
Again, that's your flawed interpretation, the DMV is just an example of it.
Your comments speak to your ignorance, I don’t really have to prove anything.
Don’t extrapolate because if one bad actor. Would you stop funding the ACLU if this story happened there?
It would certainly make me pause until they explained themselves
If true, I never donated to Wikipedia before anyhow.