Context:

The article in question was well sourced, factually accurate, and written by a well-renowned author and journalist whose work appears elsewhere too, regardless of which outlet published it.

Nonetheless, Jordan Lund is once again blindly trusting a pro-zionist conservative outlet masquerading as a bias and fact checker that nothing from anywhere that criticizes the fascist apartheid regime can be reliable 🤦

  • _cryptagion [he/him]@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Weekly reminder that Jordan Lund is the same piece of shit Zionist redditor that hates BLM because protests are too loud and inconvenience him. The dude is a republican shitstain.

  • remon@ani.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    4 hours ago

    The community rules cleary states that opinion pieces and unreliable sources are subject to removal. You posted the epitome of an unreliable source. This is just enforcing the rules.

    YDI.

    • _cryptagion [he/him]@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Doesn’t matter what the source is, anybody with eyes can figure out that the article is truthful from the fact Glasgow fans have a habit of bringing giant Palestinian flags to games.

      Plus, Jordan is a piece of shit conservative who hates minorities.

    • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      4 hours ago

      It’s not an opinion piece and the author himself is a reliable source.

      By the logic of you and jordanlund, everything Malala Yousafzai ever said in should have been dismissed as unreliable for happening in a Taliban-controlled area.

      Or, for a less hyperbolic example of the opposite, automatically trusting every source with a good reputation to the point where you trust the New York Times on stories regarding Palestine or cops.

      • remon@ani.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        4 hours ago

        It’s not an opinion piece and the author himself is a reliable source.

        But the website that is publishing it, isn’t. There is also the occasional accurate article on breitbart or foxnews … doesn’t mean those sources should be allowed.

        If your author is reliable, surley a more reliable source will publish his article. Link to that instead.

        By the logic of you and jordanlund, everything Malala Yousafzai ever said in should have been dismissed as unreliable for happening in a Taliban-controlled area.

        There is no logic to that statement.

        Or, for a less hyperbolic example of the opposite, automatically trusting every source with a good reputation to the point where you trust the New York Times on stories regarding Palestine or cops.

        If a source has repeatedly demonstratate to be unreliable, that is a good reason to completely avoid that source. But that does in no way imply that a source that has demonstrated to be reliable should always be trusted. Not even sure how you got there.

        • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          4 hours ago

          There is also the occasional accurate article on breitbart or foxnews

          Not really, no. They DEFINITELY don’t have a whole topic area where they’re generally reliable, like Mint has with Palestine.

          I’m not saying that Mint don’t publish misinformation and other bullshit as well, but on Palestine specifically, they seem to be ok from what little I’ve seen.

          If your author is reliable, surley a more reliable source will publish his article.

          That would be the case if it was a general interest news story, sure, but not an article about solidarity amongst football fans.

          While rage bait tends to get circulated widely, only certain outlets will publish a POSITIVE story, even if it DOES relate to a controversial subject.

          If a source has repeatedly demonstratate to be unreliable, that is a good reason to completely avoid that source

          Unless its reliability varies from subject to subject. Like in this case where a site that might be susceptible to Kremlin propaganda might also publish good stories that other outlets wouldn’t.

          But that does in no way imply that a source that has demonstrated to be reliable should always be trusted. Not even sure how you got there.

          I got there by applying logic to demonstrate how illogical and prejudiced your absolutist stance is.

          If unreliable = always unreliable, it logically follows that reliable = always reliable. Claiming otherwise is textbook hypocrisy and intellectually dishonest or at least a sign of poor self-awareness.

          • remon@ani.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            3 hours ago

            I’m not saying that Mint don’t publish misinformation and other bullshit as well, but on Palestine specifically, they seem to be ok from what little I’ve seen.

            And if you asked on .grad or .ml, peopel will say their reporting on Russia/Ukraine is ok, too.

            The fact that this publisher was funded by the Syrian, Russian and Iranian government is more then enough red flags for me to compleltey dismiss them as a source. If individual articles have merit, they’ll be published somewhere else.

            Like in this case where a site that might be susceptible to Kremlin propaganda might also publish good stories that other outlets wouldn’t.

            If the only site willing to publish a specific article is a Kremlin propaganda site, you should stop and ask why.

            If unreliable = always unreliable, it logically follows that reliable = always reliable. Claiming otherwise is textbook hypocrisy and intellectually dishonest or at least a sign of poor self-awareness.

            That is some terrible logic.

            Ignoring someone that has repeatedly and deliberately lied to you is common sense. They can’t be trusted. But that doesn’t mean that someone that has never lied to you is infallible. They could still make mistakes or start lying to you tomorrow. You should never turst blindly. They are two completely indepent scenarios.

  • 9point6@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    17 hours ago

    But anyone who isn’t a moron knows that MBFC is an incredibly biased source… Right?

    Literally they make it so obvious

    • Eugene V. Debs' Ghost@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      16 hours ago

      They think that because it claims to be accurate, therefore it is. No fact checking of themselves, no matter how it is completely wrong and treats liberal media as far left, and fox news are center right, it’s the godsend for the mods to remove anything they dislike.

      • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        15 hours ago

        Yes, but I forgive all of you for disagreeing with me sometimes. I can’t expect perfection.

        Just obedience when the revolution kicks off.

  • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    13 hours ago

    This is the mod who shielded UniversalMonk for months and only banned them once like 1000 people loudly harped on it for weeks. Fuck that guy

    • Universal Monk@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      12 hours ago

      Nobody shielded me. People don’t get banned just because “1000 people” harp on it. If the person follows the rules of the community, then they should be allowed to stay.

      Also, about the OP’s example. He deserved it. Because mint press sucks. But talking about me, in this thread if off topic. I had nothing to do with this OP.

  • Broadfern@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    46
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    18 hours ago

    Christ on a bike.

    I have a hard time taking seriously anything or anyone who says “Far-Left Biased” (esp. with that capitalization) unironically.

    Lazy PTB on the grounds of (maybe mindlessly) parroting Fox News rhetoric instead of researching themselves.

  • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    17 hours ago

    TIL Mint Press News.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MintPress_News

    MintPress News supported former Syrian president Bashar al-Assad, and the governments of Russia and Iran.[3][4]

    The editor had investors, who Muhawesh claimed were “retired businesspeople”, but she would not name them

    Soon afterward, Brian Lambert of MinnPost wrote an article following up on Burke’s challenge to find out where MintPress’s money came from. He reported that emails to them went unanswered, their phone was disconnected, and the original office address in Plymouth, Minnesota, “haven’t been valid in well over a year”. While MintPress listed 20 of its writers, Lambert wrote it did not indicate where the money was “coming from to pay any of these people”.[16]

    MintPress News has reposted content from Russian state media outlets RT and Sputnik,[25][26] and is listed as a “partner” of PeaceData, a Russian fake news site run by the Internet Research Agency.[27][28][29] A report from New Knowledge includes MintPress News as part of the “Russian web of disinformation,”[30][31] and the site has published fake authors attributed to the GRU, the Russian military intelligence agency.[32] MintPress News defended Russia’s invasion of Crimea, claiming Ukraine’s post-revolution government was “illegitimate”.[33]

    Sounds like YDI. MBFC is horrible of course, but it sounds like in this case they got it right (somehow focusing in one of the only things Mint Press gets right, being “anti-Israel”, presumably as a performative cover so they’ll fit in better among other general left wing news. Which of course triggered MBFC, which is part of the whole reason why it’s clever for them to include a whole bunch of “Israel’s the bad guys” in among the “Russia’s the good guys.”)

    • Heyting@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      Nederlands
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      13 hours ago

      With those standards basically all mainstream US media should be banned for publishing Israeli and US propaganda that defends their genocide on the Palestinians

    • Maeve@kbin.earth
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      16 hours ago

      You can follow sources on mint press. It’s work and I don’t read every article from there or from there. It’s not rocket science, just work and what I’ve read had checked out.

      • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        15 hours ago

        What?

        Did something I said sound like “the problem is that it’s rocket science”? I feel like your message was intended to respond to someone else or something. The problem is that it’s Russian propaganda, not that you “can’t follow sources” or whatever.

        • Maeve@kbin.earth
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          15 hours ago

          My point is, they well -source their articles, which is a lot more than can often be said for legacy media. I don’t care if it’s obl if the sources are cited and easily verifiable. Because obl asked us nicely for a long time before Saudi nationals on a plane hit the wtc and the ~W admin invaded checks notes Iraq the second time, since the issue was, iirc, the president there wanting to fund his state un food-for-oil account with petro_euro_ rather than petro_dollar_. amassed wmd, which legacy media assured us they’d seen proof, which turned out to be manufactured.

          • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            14
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            15 hours ago

            Plane hit the WTC?

            Invaded Iraq?

            What the fuck are you talking about? No one is saying they don’t “source” their articles. The problem is they post things like:

            https://www.mintpressnews.com/textbook-politics-new-geography-book-and-atlas-recognize-russias-claim-to-crimea/210441/

            Although the United Nations and many Western governments continue to object to Russia’s claims over Crimea

            After Ukraine distanced itself economically and politically from Russia on the heels of the Euromaidan protests of 2013, the residents of the Crimean Peninsula of Ukraine overwhelmingly voted to break away from Ukraine and rejoin Russia. Russia announced the annexation of the region soon after, but the move has not been recognized by Ukraine or its NATO allies, leading to months of tense, sometimes violent conflict.

            https://www.mintpressnews.com/western-media-ignore-critical-information-snipers-killed-euromaidan-protesters-ukraine/186661/

            Instead of keeping its end of the bargain, the Ukrainian mainstream opposition executed a coup through the use of violence by organized ultra-nationalist gangs, which some analysts have compared to stay-behinds or secretive militias that were created by NATO during the Cold War.

            https://www.mintpressnews.com/syria-ghouta-claim-saudi-supplied-rebels-chemical-attack/168135/

            And so on

              • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                3 hours ago

                lol

                Just to do my due diligence: An easy hallmark of propaganda is that it keeps changing. Russia had every right to invade Crimea, because Crimea is Russia. Russia is not invading Crimea, those soldiers going over the border are nothing to do with us. The problem in Crimea is “tense, sometimes violent conflict” after Russia “announced the annexation.” Fast forward to 2022, and Russia is definitely not going to invade the rest of Ukraine. All these Western intelligence reports that say we’re going to invade are just Russophobia. We’re not even invading, we’re just trying to “denazify” Ukraine and remove this illegitimate government to help the Ukrainians. Most Ukrainians support the invasion. Anyway, it’s all the West’s fault we invaded, because NATO provoked us. We definitely want peace, this whole situation “just happened” somehow, and now any agreement that involves enforcement of peace with enough teeth that we can’t unilaterally ignore it sends us into a rage and means we stop negotiating.

                And yes, of course this applies also to Western propaganda. You can see the same sort of pattern sometimes in what they say about Israel for example. The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. But the Russian POV about Ukraine or Syria is nothing but jingoistic poppycock. It deserves no respect.

            • Maeve@kbin.earth
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              11
              ·
              15 hours ago

              Because we forget certain things and they go the way of the memory hole doesn’t make them untrue. It’s a mess there, and my country also stirred that up.

  • unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    18 hours ago

    Oh i just realized that stupid bias check bot has been gone for a while. Everyone hated it so i guess it was killed or blocked at some point? Anyone know the story?

    • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      18 hours ago

      Personally I haven’t seen it for ages because I blocked it, but if I was to guess, the mods finally relented to the overwhelming majority? 🤷

      • Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        17 hours ago

        They held a vote after insisting for ages that it was a ‘small minority’ of users that had a problem with it. It wasn’t 90/10, but it wasn’t 50/50 either.

        Oh, and they only held the vote after jordanlund claimed he would get demodded by the admins if he removed the bot. And when someone pinged an admin they said they had no idea how he got that impression, lol.

        • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          15 hours ago

          Also, a big part of their argument was that it was the only option, nothing else would do that had an API endpoint and had affordable terms of use. I offered to provide them an API endpoint to Wikipedia’s sources list (which is precisely the same thing as MBFC, just… accurate and detailed) in exactly the same format, and they said no no that won’t do. I wrote code to actually fetch and parse Wikipedia’s list so they could make the bot follow actually-accurate source rankings with additional details and everything. Rooki silently received the message, then there was a long delay, then a little “Wikipedia” line started showing up way down below the awful MBFC rankings that were still front and center.

          • Heyting@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            Nederlands
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            13 hours ago

            Wikipedia’s source list is very US biased as wel. They list CIA front Radio Free Asia as trusted source.

        • Eugene V. Debs' Ghost@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          12 hours ago

          Yeah Jordanlund has a history of lying about why he does certain things. The fact that he said that when you can just simply ask the admins if that’s true or not, is enough for me to never trust him.

          The dude has recently been saying how much he is against what’s happening in Gaza, but people brought up screenshots of him saying he was a fan of sending more bombs to Israel, and removing posts highlighting the increase in weapons being sent to Israel in the last 4 years.

          The dude would have to get his neighbors to call the dogs home because they wouldn’t believe him.

        • Maeve@kbin.earth
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          16 hours ago

          Are you serious? Because I really wanted to give Jordan the benefit of doubt mod decisions were flawed, but a though job on his part. ;(

          Edit: NVM jordanlund has removed a thread by @[email protected] avatar miss_demeanour in politics - He voted for Trump. Now his wife sits in an ICE detention center.

          • Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            15 hours ago

            Took me a bit to find it; it was in a direct reply to an admin rather than pinging them. They also give a link to the thread where JL claims the admins would sack him if he got rid of the bot.

              • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                13
                ·
                edit-2
                15 hours ago

                That whole conversation is so weird. I went back and reread big sections of it, and it’s just… the conversation is off. Jordan says he can’t remove the bot, because the admins won’t allow it. Rooki says that’s definitely not true, so people ask Jordan about it… and he’s just silent. Not “oh I must have misunderstood” or anything else, just pretending that if he doesn’t say anything, no one will notice that someone asked him a question, and everyone will move on. And then there’s Rooki accepting the code for scanning Wikipedia’s sources… but totally missing the point that the MBFC sources are awful, and the WP reliable sources list is actually quite good, and deciding that MBFC and Ground News are what needs to be positioned front and center. Also seeming totally uninterested in the idea of improving the quality of the ratings in response to the clear consensus of the community with citations.

                I checked the last of the stuff that MBFC bot posted, 4 months ago, and the little line where the Wikipedia rating had previously featured had been replaced to a link to the WP article about the source, missing the whole point of categorizing sources cleanly into bullshit/not bullshit or the point that certain sources (Newsweek) had clearly slid into unreliability over time, but were still allowed on the lemmy.world subs for some reason.

                It’s just so strange. Someone had a conspiracy theory that one of the admins had an unannounced sponsorship deal with Ground News, and that was the whole reason behind the entire thing to drop a link to Ground News while misdirecting everyone into getting mad at MBFC or something. I have no idea. It was just weird.

                • Maeve@kbin.earth
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  15 hours ago

                  I don’t envy the unpaid mod job, especially mods who work hard to be fair and honest. I get your disdain and distrust of mintpress too and I hope you’ll reconsider. They do source their articles very well, because they know their audience and we’re foolable, but not always.

              • jordanlund@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                7
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                edit-2
                14 hours ago

                No worries. I think a lot of the problem is that people don’t know how moderation works.

                We don’t hang out in the group waiting to pounce on posts looking to fuck with people. Well, I shouldn’t say “we”, I don’t do that. :)

                There’s a queue of reports and it looks like this:

                So when I look at reports, it’s a matter of “is this true?”

                Going to the politics community, I searched for “ICE detention” and sorted by “New”. Boom, there it was #1 and #2, two posts with the same thumbnail, one 6 hours old, one 7 hours old.

                Same thumbnail doesn’t necessarily mean anything, same link? Yeah, same link.

                Here’s where it gets tricky:

                Which one do you remove? The knee jerk is “Well, duh, the newer one.” But in this case, the newer one has more upvotes for some reason.

                At that point, I looked at the comments, the newer one had more upvotes, but fewer comments. One of them needs to go, I picked that one. If it had had more upvotes AND more comments, I’d have kept it with a note on the other as “removed for duplicate and lower community engagement.”

                • Maeve@kbin.earth
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  14 hours ago

                  Thanks for a detailed and well-explained reply. I understand. A lot of the problem seems that being questionable often enough that everything is sus. It can be corrected with diligence and determination on the moderators’ parts. Which is simple, but not necessarily easy.

    • catloaf@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      18 hours ago

      Yeah people kept complaining so eventually they just quietly turned it off

    • ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      17 hours ago

      There was a public vote on whether to eliminate it or not from the .world news and politics communities, and the vote to remove won, thankfully!

  • misk@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    18 hours ago

    I lack any context but if the rule is against questionable sources and a mod is able to document that the source is questionable then surely there other news outlets are reporting on that too that you can use. Unless there’s a big conspiracy against that.

    • comfy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      17 hours ago

      No conspiracy required. The Celtic fans’ antifascist and pro-Palestinian position is not news, so I see no reason to expect non-left outlets to report an equivalent opinion piece. In fact, this second image was reported in news 9 years ago[1].

      That said, Manufacturing Consent is an excellent introduction to why mass media bias has emerged.

      • jordanlund@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 hours ago

        For [email protected] if you look at the rule, it’s that opinion based articles “MAY” be removed, they aren’t just automatically removed because they’re opinion.

        As a rule, I don’t have a beef with opinion articles as long as they are informative and fact based. If they go off the rails into “Well, Ukraine shouldn’t have antagonized Russia!” or some such, I’ll remove it for misinfornation, not because it’s opinion.

        • nomoesyankho@lemmy.wtf
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          5 hours ago

          yeah how dare they not follow our jingoist propaganda? Put them on the electric chair!!!

          genapos

      • misk@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        17 hours ago

        Avoiding non-newsworthy content might be a part of intention behind the rule but whether that makes sense depends on how you want to run a community. I try to make an effort to not assume ill intent (not always successful) and this just looks like a mod is using external list not to be critiqued for arbitrary choices and that only works if no exceptions are made.

  • Maeve@kbin.earth
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    18 hours ago

    We already know legacy media is heavily biased because it’s owned by the same handful of businesses. And I understand questionable sources such as Breitbart being removed. Yet here we are.

  • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    18 hours ago

    His shameless bias has been throughly exposed … Block the politics and news communities on world folks…

    Deny the parasite engagement, let him create a Zionist echo chamber lol

    • jordanlund@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      9 hours ago

      If you think I’m zionist when my personal opinion is Israel needs to be militarily forced into a two state solution then I’m doing my job correctly.

        • jordanlund@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          50 minutes ago

          Exactly, and it should never be. When my personal opinions get in the way of moderating, then that’s a fail.

        • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          That’s the part of the shill op…

          It is hard to be a Zionist on fedi openly so they play this coy shit while pretending to be “the voice of reason”

          Saying I am for two statr solution now is disingenuous considering Gaza is ruined and attacks on west bank are acceleratinh…

          • jordanlund@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 hours ago

            I’ve always been in favor of a two state solution, the problem is Israel won’t do it on their own, and nobody has the balls to occupy them and force them to do it.