In his latest article on the goings on at the Free Online Encyclopedia That Anyone On The Left Can Edit, GamerGate supporter (and former Wikipedia editor) T.D. Adler (The Devil's Advocate) helpfully informs that, after a monthlong discussion involving 150 of the site's editors, Fox News has been deemed to no longer be a "generally reliably" source on contentious political and scientific topics. And just in time for 2020 U.S. Presidential Election, too. This is considered a downgrade from its previous status, where it was considered generally reliable on all topics.
In what should come as a surprise to absolutely no one, the charge to get Fox Newd deemed unreliable is being led by ideologically-motivated editors who, in the past, were responsible for such things as getting "Breitbart", "The Daily Mail", "The Epoch Times", "Gateway Pundit", "Zero Hedge", and "FrontPage Magazine" removed or banned as reliable sources and smearing not only those publications but also individuals they disagreed with such as Candace Owens, Mark Levin, and Tucker Carlson through selective editing and cherrypicking sources. Some of the lone voices of sanity included Ad Orientem and Atsme, the latter of whom stated that the left-wing editors seemed to be initiating votes on Fox News' reliability at every available opportunity with the intention of continuing to do so until they achieved their desired result.
Sane people also discourage the use of Wikipedia as a source on contentious content. It's what happens when editors are more concerned on their point of view and activism than publishing all sources.
Yes only Fox News Is biased. Don Lemon is right down the center amirite
I heard Don likes lemons right down the center, if that's what you mean.
I heard Don likes lemons right down the center, if that's what you mean.
In his latest article on the goings on at the Free Online Encyclopedia That Anyone On The Left Can Edit, GamerGate supporter (and former Wikipedia editor) T.D. Adler (The Devil's Advocate) helpfully informs that, after a monthlong discussion involving 150 of the site's editors, Fox News has been deemed to no longer be a "generally reliably" source on contentious political and scientific topics. And just in time for 2020 U.S. Presidential Election, too. This is considered a downgrade from its previous status, where it was considered generally reliable on all topics.
In what should come as a surprise to absolutely no one, the charge to get Fox Newd deemed unreliable is being led by ideologically-motivated editors who, in the past, were responsible for such things as getting "Breitbart", "The Daily Mail", "The Epoch Times", "Gateway Pundit", "Zero Hedge", and "FrontPage Magazine" removed or banned as reliable sources and smearing not only those publications but also individuals they disagreed with such as Candace Owens, Mark Levin, and Tucker Carlson through selective editing and cherrypicking sources. Some of the lone voices of sanity included Ad Orientem and Atsme, the latter of whom stated that the left-wing editors seemed to be initiating votes on Fox News' reliability at every available opportunity with the intention of continuing to do so until they achieved their desired result.
Original Article: http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2020/07/22/wikipedia-discourages-editors-from-using-fox-news-as-a-source-on-contentious-content/
Sane people also discourage the use of Wikipedia as a source on contentious content. It's what happens when editors are more concerned on their point of view and activism than publishing all sources.