Reply With QuoteWhat do you think disallowing sources that don't fit in with a certain agenda means? And how about the timing, does it fit with the war on fake news?Originally Posted by Kris
| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
So you are an expert about everything only when it suits you?
What do you think disallowing sources that don't fit in with a certain agenda means? And how about the timing, does it fit with the war on fake news?
Very interesting. A whistle blower takes on a multi-billion dollar industry and negative articles penned by experts appear soon afterwards. It would be more interesting if responses like this didn't happen, as it is always the same pattern of events with the same predictable outcomes.
Talking of the words "subtle" and "agenda", the former is just about the last word I'd apply when describing the latter when it comes to the Daily Mail - it could be of course that Wikipedia has a point when it describes the Daily Mail as "generally unreliable" with a history of "poor fact checking, sensationalism and flat-out fabrication".
I agree with you, but every entity has it's own agenda. Ultimately, why not let the people decide for themselves? If you know a thing or two about journalism, and I think you do, then you will know all about the tricks of the trade.
Not denying that, but I'd like to think that, even in an increasingly cynical and manipulative world, sometimes decisions are made for reasons of truth and fairness - I'd be loath to use anything that the Mirror printed, to go to a different end of the political spectrum, if I were making the decisions at Wikipedia, but the Mail seems the worst of the lot to me.
Are you saying that Wikipedia should allow any old shit?
The DM are pro-Brexit. Cameron tried to silence them in the run-up to the referendum by asking the owner to fire the editor. And now Wikileaks don't like their anti-globalist stance, so they have decided to exclude them from any discussion regarding globalisation. Wikileaks aren't the only ones who are guilty of this kind of behaviour, and I find this whole war on fake news rather distasteful.The fact is most information is tainted one way or another, so just let the people decide. We are not children.
They don't actually do that, so no need for the misdirection. I shouldn't have to point out that purposly excluding a specific source of information is an entirely different topic.
Not different at all. Every source that they have excluded in the past has been done so deliberately and for a reason. Why should the Mail Online be an exception?
If you think the people should decide for themselves then you should surely agree that they should let anything and everything be a source.
Wikileaks have editors who discuss the validity of the various citations on a per entry basis. The blanket ban of a specific news provider is a different thing altogether, and will likely lead to the suppression of valid information. If they are going to block the DM, they might as well block the BBC too, as they are just as bad when it comes to selective reporting
How many newspapers are banned by Wikipedia? If the mail is one of a select few then doesn't that suggest there is a good reason for that?Wikileaks have editors who discuss the validity of the various citations on a per entry basis. The blanket ban of a specific news provider is a different thing altogether, and will likely lead to the suppression of valid information. If they are going to block the DM, they might as well block the BBC too, as they are just as bad when it comes to selective reporting
And I'm not sure 'selective reporting' was why they were banned.
I am just noting that the DM have a pro-Brexit and anti-globalist outlook. The then the prime minister even tried to suppress their message during the referendum campaign. I think you are asking the wrong questions, either purposely, or you are not aware of the information war currently in progress. It would appear to me that the DM are providing the 'wrong type of news'.
That's exactly why I'm asking. If the Mail are doing the wrong type of news then you would expect a number of other papers to be blacklisted as well.
The DM is the biggest news website in the world. I would imagine the Globalists are more than happy with this little development
So do we know how many other newspapers are blacklisted or not?
It is irrelevant, we are discussing the DM here.
I can understand why you don't want to try to answer that.
Really? All you need to know is that the largest news website in the world has just been discredited as perveyors of fake news. And you are totally ignoring the fact that they just happen to be the biggest voice for Brexit and anti-globalism. PS Another job well done by Mr SorosI can understand why you don't want to try to answer that.
Surely you can't get any more mainstream than that?Really? All you need to know is that the largest news website in the world has just been discredited as perveyors of fake news. And you are totally ignoring the fact that they just happen to be the biggest voice for Brexit and anti-globalism. PS Another job well done by Mr Soros
The real story here is the suppression of dissenting voices, and I don't agree with any forms of media censorship. However, this is what the fake news agenda is all about and it is a very slippery slope.
Where you see fake news agendas, I see a site that I would have thought is now the first place many in the world now go to for general information and knowledge saying that they will not use the Daily Mail as a source because they think it is "generally unreliable" and has a history of "poor fact checking, sensationalism and flat-out fabrication". Wikipedia is not saying that about other mainstream British newspapers that offer what you call a dissenting voice on Brexit, so, for now at least, I'm prepared to accept that the reasons they give for not using the Daily Mail are genuine.
That's the thing, it's done in such a way that you are supposed to accept the reasons
Been a couple of weeks now. Any update?Let's see what happens, eh
Posting Permissions
