24
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 24 Aug 2025
24 points (70.0% liked)
World News
39517 readers
282 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
No they don't. Ultimately ownership chooses who works there.
How did you determine this?
Pure vibes based statement.
How did you determine the this? Because it tells you narratives that agree with your world view?
I read and compare. When Maccabi supporters were picking fights with Arab taxi drivers in Amsterdam, they didn't blindly repeat the government story about pogroms but told what really happened, a story that eventually won out. They've never shied away from stories inconvenient to any government or corporate interest, as long as it's based in facts.
They're highly regarded for their objectivity.
If you want to attack them, you've got to come up with more than vibes.
And the fact that you're baselessly attacking them while defending Tass, is outright ridiculous.
How did you determine what "really happened"?
How did you determine that? You don't know what stories they elect not to run.
By who? People who agree with their bias?
Mate, you're the one who's been making claims based on vibes. I'm not the one just asserting that they're objective and honest without evidence.
Strawman
Finally a productive question. You listen to all the sides. You listen to independent media on the ground. You don't just cling to whatever story happens to fit your worldview, but you consider the different stories and watch what adds up and what doesn't. Who leaves out what details to better fit their narrative and who tells the whole thing.
And sure, that means you've got to do some work. Put in some actual critical thought. And yes, lots of people don't like that just stick to whatever narrative they prefer, or even whatever is fed to them. But looking critically at media is a vital survival skill these days.
Blindly accepting known partisan media on the very topic you know they can't be objective about, is not that.
No, I asked how you did it. Because you clearly didn't listen to all sides, and you clearly did just cling to whatever story happens to fit your worldview. You were even at the point of lying to defend your worldview
How do you determine what "the whole thing" is?
Lol, maybe you should try it then.
Then you should stop doing it.
Except sides published by state media in countries you don't like, or media that you personally have determined is false. So no you do not listen to all sides, you listen to all sides that fit your worldview. This isn't complicated for everyone else in this thread but it's apparently quite complicated for you
Do you think the state media of a nation committing atrocities is going to tell you the truth about those atrocities? Do you believe Israeli denial of genocide in Gaza?
If you do, you're a naive tool of imperialists.
So do you or don't you listen to all sides. I'm confused
I listen, but I don't believe them all. You have to apply some critical thinking.
And your version of critical thinking is "American billionaires would never use their money and influence to further their goals through media" huh?
No, it is quite the opposite.
This you?
Critical thinking is when I say one thing without thinking about it and then later I say a completely different thing without thinking about it
Lol, so much for "I listen to all sides'