Anonymous mother_russia 16w

Holy based

10

Anonymous mother_russia 16w

There’s a difference between an outlet which clearly labels oped’s versus say fox entertainment

14

Anonymous mother_russia 16w

They are corporations and businesses just like everything else in this country and when things are done for a profit, you can’t really trust it completely.

6

Anonymous mother_russia 16w

Not saying all of it is lies or intentionally deceptive or anyone working for them is bad, I definitely hate some of them way more than others *ahem* Fox News *ahem* but everything in them I would double check the sources on

3

Anonymous #2 16w

lol yeah I just said something about that before I saw your comment. I definitely agree that there is a difference

3

Anonymous mother_russia 16w

I TRUST THE WEATHER CHANNEL (i think)

11

Anonymous #1 16w

Oh yeah weather is fine lmao I missed that one in the lot

10

Anonymous mother_russia 16w

Nah man, they have weather machines— and space lasers. That’s how they know where the bad weather will be. /j

12

Anonymous boariskarloff 16w

😂😂

9

Anonymous boariskarloff 16w

The frogs are gay too can forget

12

Anonymous big_al_the_riddler 16w

Also the AP being less trusted than CNN or the BBC is ridiculous lol

11

Anonymous boariskarloff 16w

I think it’s hilarious that there’s a portion of republicans that don’t trust the weather channel. Like, it’s the fucking weather channel dude lol

21

Anonymous #5 16w

The weatherTHEM (woke meteorologists) are using their rain machines to put chemicals into the water to TURN THE FRICKIN’ FROGS GAY!!

17

Anonymous boariskarloff 16w

They’re just mad that the weather channel didn’t condone throwing nukes into hurricanes like Donny wanted lol

6

Anonymous #2 16w

fr

1

Anonymous #1 16w

yes it’s just maybe better than other weather channels hahaha

3

Anonymous big_al_the_riddler 16w

National Enquirer too 💀

2

Anonymous #10 16w

Why the fuck are Dems trusting the National Review and Washington Examiner jfc

3

Anonymous #10 16w

Daily Mail is pissed they were excluded 💀

2

Anonymous big_al_the_riddler 16w

Journalism student take

2

Anonymous mother_russia 16w

Dude I’m ngl that’s sort of a defeatist centrist position that doesn’t really lead you anywhere. You can’t see everything with your own eyes so we have to have journalists. Some journalists and some outlets are gonna be better than others, you just find the better ones and cross check things if you’re doubtful. Your point sounds like the people who don’t trust any medicines because they’re made by big corporations. Both news outlets and medical companies have an interest in doing a good job

4

Anonymous #12 16w

nah #12 you seem like someone who doesn’t see anything with your own eyes ngl 😮‍💨😮‍💨

3

Anonymous #12 16w

There’s also ways to determine which ones are the more trustworthy ones. If you abandon all of these news outlets that are actually held accountable when they make errors then you’re left scouring 4chan and Reddit for news which is much worse. You can’t let extreme cynicism get in the way of practical logic

3

Anonymous #9 16w

Fox told me that Obama had immigrants put chips in peoples eyes during the solar eclipse so I don’t really trust em anymore tbh 🤷

4

Anonymous #12 16w

oh dangg

1

Anonymous #12 16w

Here’s the thing, not all news is relevant. If something is important enough or relevant, people will naturally talk about it. I listen to direct people who report on individual issues that I trust because they have a good history and if I believe it seems unrealistic or something off then I check the sources myself. Honestly for anything medicine or science, I don’t like articles. I like the actual written study. But if it’s trump is doing this or saying this, I just go to the gov cite where

5

Anonymous #12 16w

They have copies of all the executive orders and I read through them. Also I feel like relevant information is that I’m chronically ill and have been kind of bedridden for the past year so I have had all the time in the world to verify everything myself. It’s not realistic for daily life for average people but I’ve just had a lot of time on my hands while recovering so I could read up on all the big issues in detail

7

Anonymous mother_russia 16w

same mother russia

5

Anonymous #12 16w

It’s nothing centralist because I hate listening to Republican media way more than liberal, it’s just that I hate how news media itself is run as a company and for views and responses and outrage rather than truth and real information. It’s a lot of click bait and exaggeration and opinions rather than hard facts

5

Anonymous mother_russia 16w

That is important context! First of all I’m sorry you’re going through that, that shit sucks and I really hope it gets better soon. I said it was defeatist and centrist because I just get so sick of the people on this app who are like “I don’t trust any politician, doctor, scientist…etc because they’re all driven by profit which means they’re purely corrupt” it just ignores the reality that there are gradients to these things and that it’s worth figuring out who and what to trust rather than dis

-3

Anonymous #12 16w

-regarding every established institution all together

4

Anonymous #12 16w

That being said, we need journalists because nobody can see everything with their own eyes, but also to your point few people have the time to read every primary source. If you do have the time to do that, that’s about as good as you can get as far as accurate information.

3

Anonymous #12 16w

I’d just say that there are specific journalists who have extensive histories of putting their lives on the line to report the truth. They wouldn’t be doing this work if they just wanted to make money. I don’t think it’s a stretch to trust some of these people and the outlets they work for. Not absolute unfaltering faith, but reasonable trust

3

Anonymous #12 16w

yes 🙂‍↕️🙂‍↕️

3

Yeah I’m confused why my first comment just now got downvoted tbh

2

Anonymous #13 16w

As a leftist, I also trust infowars more than Fox News tbh

4

Anonymous boariskarloff 16w

Seriously? Infowars? Mr. Turning the frogs gay

3

Anonymous #12 16w

Yeah specific journalists I’ll definitely trust on things. I can trust individuals but not large corporations normally. Personally, I think a lot of new age journalists are actually making videos that go in-depth into topics now which I appreciate a lot more.

7

Anonymous mother_russia 16w

It’s hard to be an independent journalist who has the resources to travel around and spend the time required to do in depth reporting. This is why notable and accomplished journalists often write for one or many reputable publications. Does their employment by these news outlets negate the trustworthiness of their work for you?

2

Anonymous #13 16w

Fox News. Mr. It’s gay to shop with your wife. Mr. Spinning a 2.8% increase in year-over-year inflation as a 2.8% decrease in one month. Mr. Tan suits are disgraceful.

4

Anonymous #13 16w

I mean Fox News had to announce in court that they are not a trustworthy news outlet and that they are purely for entertainment purposes only.

6

Anonymous #13 15w

It was a stretch and a wild oversimplification, but yes, chemicals such as atrazine were dumped into rivers and studies showed it affected tadpole development (I believe some became hermaphrodites?). Other stuff like the sandy hook shit was plainly insane though

2

Anonymous #10 15w

We can agree that that’s an absolute misconstruction of the study though, right?

3