CDZ What News Checker Would You Trust?

[OldLady]

This week, there has been talk about Google trying to slow down its "fake news" sites by not allowing them ad services. There has been a lot of screaming about that, that it is the left's attempt at shutting down conservative speech. I get it that Google made its liberal bias known during the election, but the election is over and it's time to come back to our senses. It is time to ensure that the "news" articles we receive on our phones and on social media are actually true. If you don't trust Google to say "not true," who will you trust?

This has been freaking me out pretty seriously, since defending the right to distribute "fake" news is well on the path to swallowing whatever propaganda comes down the pike, most often by government types and politicos.
It is against everything my generation was ever taught. It should be against everything the current generation is willing to accept, as well. It's so scary, I don't want to argue about it; I want to find an answer.

Below is an article listing 6 fact checking sites that seem to be valid. You may know of others. I'd love your input.

6 Best Fact Checking Websites That Help You Distinguish Between Truth and Rumors

 

[Auld Phart]

It was 50/50 between Reuters and AP.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

So lefties get to decide what is and is not real? Remind me how you would feel if a right leaning group tried that?

 

[OldLady]

So lefties get to decide what is and is not real? Remind me how you would feel if a right leaning group tried that?

No, the point of this thread is, what group would you trust? Do you trust any of the ones listed in the poll?

 

[AnCap'n_Murica]

NOTA

 

[Fenton Lum]

So lefties get to decide what is and is not real? Remind me how you would feel if a right leaning group tried that?

That's the goal of the entire ruse, the masses are to be programmed toward the absence of the concept of truth, everything is suspect, you cannot trust anyone outside your own silo. An utterly fractured, divided, distrustful and hateful population can never truly challenge the status quo.

Oh, and they do, but the system requires that the masses be also programmed to regurgitate that only that "other side" does that stuff.

 

[OldLady]

NOTA

Any, Captain?

 

[g5000]

6 Best Fact Checking Websites That Help You Distinguish Between Truth and Rumors

I generally trust Snopes. Snopes provides actual evidence to support their articles which you can read for yourself. The tards who dismiss Snopes only do so because Snopes utterly destroys the lies being shoveled into their credulous empty heads. They haven't a single critical thinking brain cell in the entire bunch.

Your link says Open Secrets is a fact checking site. I don't really consider it a fact checking site. It does not take on the herculean task of debunking stories that are out there. However, Open Secrets is a very good site for finding out who has donated to politicians. I have used their site extensively in discussions on this forum.

 

[OldLady]

So lefties get to decide what is and is not real? Remind me how you would feel if a right leaning group tried that?

That's the goal of the entire ruse, the masses are to be programmed toward the absence of the concept of truth, everything is suspect, you cannot trust anyone outside your own silo. An utterly fractured, divided, distrustful and hateful population can never truly challenge the status quo.

Oh, and they do, but the system requires that the masses be also programmed to regurgitate that only that "other side" does that stuff.

How do we turn that around?

 

[Fenton Lum]

So lefties get to decide what is and is not real? Remind me how you would feel if a right leaning group tried that?

That's the goal of the entire ruse, the masses are to be programmed toward the absence of the concept of truth, everything is suspect, you cannot trust anyone outside your own silo. An utterly fractured, divided, distrustful and hateful population can never truly challenge the status quo.

Oh, and they do, but the system requires that the masses be also programmed to regurgitate that only that "other side" does that stuff.

How do we turn that around?

One at a time, person by person, one day at a time, one human to human interaction at a time. This shyte only works because we cooperate, participate, offer up our tacit approval, and blame others instead of taking responsibility.

Take the media everyone's always complaining about. Don't watch, don't participate.

 

[OldLady]

So lefties get to decide what is and is not real? Remind me how you would feel if a right leaning group tried that?

That's the goal of the entire ruse, the masses are to be programmed toward the absence of the concept of truth, everything is suspect, you cannot trust anyone outside your own silo. An utterly fractured, divided, distrustful and hateful population can never truly challenge the status quo.

Oh, and they do, but the system requires that the masses be also programmed to regurgitate that only that "other side" does that stuff.

How do we turn that around?

One at a time, person by person, one day at a time, one human to human interaction at a time. This shyte only works because we cooperate, participate, offer up our tacit approval, and blame others instead of taking responsibility.

Take the media everyone's always complaining about. Don't watch, don't participate.

Did you vote in the poll? Who would you trust, to back up the admittedly serious action of pulling an article as "fake?" from social media?
I feel we have to participate in catching up the truth in publishing laws that have not kept abreast with the advent of the internet. There is no protection for us except our wits. Ignoring does not help, imo.

 

[Papageorgio]

So lefties get to decide what is and is not real? Remind me how you would feel if a right leaning group tried that?

No, the point of this thread is, what group would you trust? Do you trust any of the ones listed in the poll?

Why do we need to trust them?

 

[Fenton Lum]

So lefties get to decide what is and is not real? Remind me how you would feel if a right leaning group tried that?

That's the goal of the entire ruse, the masses are to be programmed toward the absence of the concept of truth, everything is suspect, you cannot trust anyone outside your own silo. An utterly fractured, divided, distrustful and hateful population can never truly challenge the status quo.

Oh, and they do, but the system requires that the masses be also programmed to regurgitate that only that "other side" does that stuff.

How do we turn that around?

One at a time, person by person, one day at a time, one human to human interaction at a time. This shyte only works because we cooperate, participate, offer up our tacit approval, and blame others instead of taking responsibility.

Take the media everyone's always complaining about. Don't watch, don't participate.

Did you vote in the poll? Who would you trust, to back up the admittedly serious action of pulling an article as "fake?" from social media?
I feel we have to participate in catching up the truth in publishing laws that have not kept abreast with the advent of the internet. There is no protection for us except our wits. Ignoring does not help, imo.

For me it is an instance by instance kinda thing, try to absorb as many "sources" as you can. Over time you will come to know what to ignore. I would never pick one, and if I did, I would never stop examining and questioning that decision. I'm not so sure about your idea that social media is an outlet for anything, I avoid it personally, and I don't look for the laws to look out for us, the unsubstantial people.

 

[OldLady]

So lefties get to decide what is and is not real? Remind me how you would feel if a right leaning group tried that?

No, the point of this thread is, what group would you trust? Do you trust any of the ones listed in the poll?

Why do we need to trust them?

Eliminating fake news sites is not about taking away free speech. If people continue to be allowed to build their own news websites and manufacture articles that are patently fake, if that is acceptable and allowed to continue, we are opening ourselves up to untold propaganda efforts by whatever opportunist decides to use them. I can understand people objecting to using "fact checkers" that they don't trust. So I'm asking, who do they trust? Make sense?

 

[OldLady]

So lefties get to decide what is and is not real? Remind me how you would feel if a right leaning group tried that?

That's the goal of the entire ruse, the masses are to be programmed toward the absence of the concept of truth, everything is suspect, you cannot trust anyone outside your own silo. An utterly fractured, divided, distrustful and hateful population can never truly challenge the status quo.

Oh, and they do, but the system requires that the masses be also programmed to regurgitate that only that "other side" does that stuff.

How do we turn that around?

One at a time, person by person, one day at a time, one human to human interaction at a time. This shyte only works because we cooperate, participate, offer up our tacit approval, and blame others instead of taking responsibility.

Take the media everyone's always complaining about. Don't watch, don't participate.

Did you vote in the poll? Who would you trust, to back up the admittedly serious action of pulling an article as "fake?" from social media?
I feel we have to participate in catching up the truth in publishing laws that have not kept abreast with the advent of the internet. There is no protection for us except our wits. Ignoring does not help, imo.

For me it is an instance by instance kinda thing, try to absorb as many "sources" as you can. Over time you will come to know what to ignore. I would never pick one, and if I did, I would never stop examining and questioning that decision. I'm not so sure about your idea that social media is an outlet for anything, I avoid it personally, and I don't look for the laws to look out for us, the unsubstantial people.

I am personally quite glad to be able to read my local newspaper and believe what I read. Same with WaPo and NYT and The Atlantic. Etc. etc. Are you taking for granted that the sources you consult are, in fact, obligated to report actual news, not fake news?

 

[Fenton Lum]

That's the goal of the entire ruse, the masses are to be programmed toward the absence of the concept of truth, everything is suspect, you cannot trust anyone outside your own silo. An utterly fractured, divided, distrustful and hateful population can never truly challenge the status quo.

Oh, and they do, but the system requires that the masses be also programmed to regurgitate that only that "other side" does that stuff.

How do we turn that around?

One at a time, person by person, one day at a time, one human to human interaction at a time. This shyte only works because we cooperate, participate, offer up our tacit approval, and blame others instead of taking responsibility.

Take the media everyone's always complaining about. Don't watch, don't participate.

Did you vote in the poll? Who would you trust, to back up the admittedly serious action of pulling an article as "fake?" from social media?
I feel we have to participate in catching up the truth in publishing laws that have not kept abreast with the advent of the internet. There is no protection for us except our wits. Ignoring does not help, imo.

For me it is an instance by instance kinda thing, try to absorb as many "sources" as you can. Over time you will come to know what to ignore. I would never pick one, and if I did, I would never stop examining and questioning that decision. I'm not so sure about your idea that social media is an outlet for anything, I avoid it personally, and I don't look for the laws to look out for us, the unsubstantial people.

I am personally quite glad to be able to read my local newspaper and believe what I read. Same with WaPo and NYT and The Atlantic. Etc. etc. Are you taking for granted that the sources you consult are, in fact, obligated to report actual news, not fake news?

They will fullfil their for profit urges first and foremost, that's what the triangulation is for. Of course track record and your own personal history with your own fact checking of them over time will factor into that. Sorry, I don't have an easy answer. This society runs on illusion and misinformation.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

None of the above.

 

[Papageorgio]

So lefties get to decide what is and is not real? Remind me how you would feel if a right leaning group tried that?

No, the point of this thread is, what group would you trust? Do you trust any of the ones listed in the poll?

Why do we need to trust them?

Eliminating fake news sites is not about taking away free speech. If people continue to be allowed to build their own news websites and manufacture articles that are patently fake, if that is acceptable and allowed to continue, we are opening ourselves up to untold propaganda efforts by whatever opportunist decides to use them. I can understand people objecting to using "fact checkers" that they don't trust. So I'm asking, who do they trust? Make sense?

Eliminating them is eliminating free speech, I see a story and I go to lengths to prove it true or not. People need to research they stuff they read.

 

[OldLady]

So lefties get to decide what is and is not real? Remind me how you would feel if a right leaning group tried that?

No, the point of this thread is, what group would you trust? Do you trust any of the ones listed in the poll?

Why do we need to trust them?

Eliminating fake news sites is not about taking away free speech. If people continue to be allowed to build their own news websites and manufacture articles that are patently fake, if that is acceptable and allowed to continue, we are opening ourselves up to untold propaganda efforts by whatever opportunist decides to use them. I can understand people objecting to using "fact checkers" that they don't trust. So I'm asking, who do they trust? Make sense?

Eliminating them is eliminating free speech, I see a story and I go to lengths to prove it true or not. People need to research they stuff they read.

Can you explain how it eliminates free speech? Are we allowed to yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater? To sell Cheetos as "organic?"

 

[OldLady]

How do we turn that around?

One at a time, person by person, one day at a time, one human to human interaction at a time. This shyte only works because we cooperate, participate, offer up our tacit approval, and blame others instead of taking responsibility.

Take the media everyone's always complaining about. Don't watch, don't participate.

Did you vote in the poll? Who would you trust, to back up the admittedly serious action of pulling an article as "fake?" from social media?
I feel we have to participate in catching up the truth in publishing laws that have not kept abreast with the advent of the internet. There is no protection for us except our wits. Ignoring does not help, imo.

For me it is an instance by instance kinda thing, try to absorb as many "sources" as you can. Over time you will come to know what to ignore. I would never pick one, and if I did, I would never stop examining and questioning that decision. I'm not so sure about your idea that social media is an outlet for anything, I avoid it personally, and I don't look for the laws to look out for us, the unsubstantial people.

I am personally quite glad to be able to read my local newspaper and believe what I read. Same with WaPo and NYT and The Atlantic. Etc. etc. Are you taking for granted that the sources you consult are, in fact, obligated to report actual news, not fake news?

They will fullfil their for profit urges first and foremost, that's what the triangulation is for. Of course track record and your own personal history with your own fact checking of them over time will factor into that. Sorry, I don't have an easy answer. This society runs on illusion and misinformation.

I don't agree it is too far gone to get back on track. Not everyone will actually take the trouble to determine if something is true; they'll just believe it. We should have SOME assurance that if the paper says Governor LePage threatened a fellow politician, he probably did. I don't live in Augusta and I don't have access to their voice mails, so there is only one way to determine the truth. I don't think it's easy--indeed, the overall reaction to this thread has been depressingly negative--but it's necessary to push the discussion. Might be the wrong board for that, though.