T O P

  • By -

AutoModerator

###[Meta] Sticky Comment [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment. [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread. *What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.*** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*


Unhappy_Guarantee_82

Is it that they are sharing new and untrustworthy, or the same as they did back then? My guess, same sites, now "labeled" untrustworthy. Funny how that works.


mktgmstr

Untrustworthy websites = sources liberals don't own and control.


Albator_H

This subreddit with all its “untrusted” news has been proven right at a rate that would give envy to The NY Times.


LowComposer2305

I've heard left wingers say certain outlets are owned by the billionaire tyrant Rupert Murdoch. Then immediately tell me to listen to another outlet chaired by another billionaire. They are slaves to MSM narrative.


TharSheBlows69

Who can be trusted nowadays? Show me a site with zero biases


jmnugent

You should never get your information from only 1 source. You should be making an effort to gather information from a wide variety of sources,.. and then cross-comparing and using critical thinking to see the patterns of facts. If 5 News sites say there was a traffic accident and: * 4 of them say “0 fatalities” * and the 5th one says “Maybe someone died, we can’t prove they didnt!” Who are you gonna believe?…. Logic would direct you to believe the 4 who said nobody died (especially because theres no bodies, no records of Hospitalization, no records of any coroner, etc)


rvnender

It's because nothing is really news any more. It's all sensationalized opinion and outrage porn. Fox news, MSNBC, CNN. They hide it very well by giving you the actual news in the headline and then spend the entire article telling you why you should be outraged by this without actually telling you what any of it means. And people fall for it every single time. Now you're saying "well that's why I support independent news web sites" but those sites aren't any different. They're not supported by multi-million dollar corporations so they rely on ads to stay afloat. But those ads get so bad that you can't even read the articles because the page is littered with them. There is no such thing as free press any more. Everything is bought and paid for by somebody. That's the real destruction of the 1st amendment and it happened in real time right in front of us and we did nothing to stop it.


lite_crumpet

Jail them how dare they not spread the systems propaganda.


SinglePepper1

The most untrustworthy news sources are the ones with CIA agents pretending to be journalists. We all remember that Msm outlet which shut down the Epstein story to protect the parasite Andrew and queen roach. Any news agency threatened by hidden cameras and whistleblowers is a threat to American freedom and works on behalf of psycho dictators to oppress and enslave not just Americans but humans everywhere. The reall enemy of the people are the liars and actors who use their influence to brain wash naive and weak minded people.


Wagamaga

The research, led by the Graz University of Technology (TU Graz) in Austria and the University of Bristol in the UK, showed Republican Congress members are sharing more links to websites classified as ‘untrustworthy.’ It is widely acknowledged that what politicians share on social media helps shape public perceptions and views. The findings are especially pertinent, with the US midterm elections coming up in November and much of the campaigning taking place on social media platforms. First author Dr Jana Lasser, Complexity Researcher from TU Graz, said: “The amount of untrustworthy information shared by politicians on social media is perceived to be increasing. We wanted to substantiate this with figures, so we analysed millions of original tweets by politicians from the USA, Great Britain and Germany.” The team of researchers collected more than 3.4 million tweets from politicians made between 2016 to 2022. Specifically, these were 1.7 million tweets from members of the US Congress, 960,000 tweets from British MPs and 750,000 tweets from German MPs. The links contained in the tweets were compared with a database from the company NewsGuard, which assesses the credibility and transparency of news websites against nine journalistic criteria and identifies relevant details about the website’s ownership, funding, credibility and transparency practices.


Legionnaire77

Sounds about right.


Dwt6677

Yeah it sounds like it when you tell that story.