Why don't people here source check their "links"?

[Texanmike]

I've noticed that around here people throw up all kinds of asinine links and provide them as if they are some sort of hard evidence of facts. MSNBC is not a legitimate source unless you have access to their source information. The same can be said for Fox news... CNN and just about every major "news" manufacturer out there. Journalistic integrity is at an all time low it would seem. How many times are polls that are designed with predetermined outcomes going to be quoted before people go out and look at the construction of the polls they are quoting? I bring this up because it seems that people on both the left and right are doing word searches in google and and literally finding the first source that agrees with them and posting it. If your link includes something like Issues why don't you verify it before you post it. It isn't a rule, I get that... but why not do it just to increase your credibility?

Just an observation. Flame away.

Mike

Where do you get your new from TM?

I go to Drudge everyday for the headlines then I go to FreeRepublic for stories posted by news sources all over the US and Internationally.

I've found that you usually have to reconstruct the news. This is especially true with quotes and "studies". When "news" involves studies the best thing to do is go back to the study and read it to determine if it was done with a bias or not. When it involves quotes you usually have to find a transcript instead of relying on the headline. Bot sides will clip around only providing the title line and never showing the quote in context. I'm to the point that when a story originates from an "unnamed source" that I am very skeptical.



Mike

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I've noticed that around here people throw up all kinds of asinine links and provide them as if they are some sort of hard evidence of facts. MSNBC is not a legitimate source unless you have access to their source information. The same can be said for Fox news... CNN and just about every major "news" manufacturer out there. Journalistic integrity is at an all time low it would seem. How many times are polls that are designed with predetermined outcomes going to be quoted before people go out and look at the construction of the polls they are quoting? I bring this up because it seems that people on both the left and right are doing word searches in google and and literally finding the first source that agrees with them and posting it. If your link includes something like Issues why don't you verify it before you post it. It isn't a rule, I get that... but why not do it just to increase your credibility?

Just an observation. Flame away.

Mike

when you compare FOX to CNN you lose all credibility

good night

1) I would say that most people these days report with the same prejudices. I mean, is it just coincidence that FOX and CNN never look at the same set of facts and view them the same? In fact, they don't view the same set of facts both sides usually ignore anything that doesn't play to their narrative.

2) I'm not saying that either side is always right or always wrong, it is probably a mix of both. The entire point of this was not to call out a side or a network but to ask why people don't do their own research or at least verify the things that an article says before linking to it.

Mike

1) FOX views facts and sees them differently than CNN, MSBC, ABC, NBC, CBS, and more. Either you believe everyone but FOX is out to get conservatives, or you believe FOX is a voice for a conservative world view.

I don't believe when the networks other than FOX ignore what you or I view as pertinent facts, that they do so to always fit a narrative that has a political agenda.

I do believe FOX has a political agenda. MSBC has had one in recent years. Now? I don't know.

2) I usually know things about a story from more than one source. I also try to dig deeper into anything that is new.

Linking to sources? Linking on web forums and social media is mostly done to make ideological points. When I link to more than one source, most everyone ignores the links. They all have ideological agendas