Brexit again...

[Fosse69]

What should we read? The Sun? The Mail, a paper which is so skewed in its reporting that Wikipedia refuses to accept it as a source? Besides, even if the other papers weren't even more based in favour of leaving than the Indie and Graun are in favour of remaining, the 'quality' papers on the right hide their content behind a pay wall. I don't particularly like The Guardian but it's by far the most user friendly in its digital incarnation.

 

I find the best test of an article is the comments when available, real insight is occasionally available especially from mainland Europeans ignoring the trolls etc. It is the criticism of the articles in the Guardian, Independent, ES etc that gives the balance, there is little point in reading echo sheets, whereas there is a wider range in the papers I have mentioned.

[philpvfc]

What should we read? The Sun? The Mail, a paper which is so skewed in its reporting that Wikipedia refuses to accept it as a source? Besides, even if the other papers weren't even more based in favour of leaving than the Indie and Graun are in favour of remaining, the 'quality' papers on the right hide their content behind a pay wall. I don't particularly like The Guardian but it's by far the most user friendly in its digital incarnation.

 

Totally reinforces what I said, praising the Guardian. Maybe you should read The Sun and The Mail to balance out some of the crap printed in the Guardian, they are 2 papers just as bad as The Independent and The Guardian but I don’t see anyone keep quoting them.

[Andyregs]

Totally reinforces what I said, praising the Guardian. Maybe you should read The Sun and The Mail to balance out some of the crap printed in the Guardian, they are 2 papers just as bad as The Independent and The Guardian but I don’t see anyone keep quoting them.

 

So where should we get our news that isn’t crap? The usual suspects are quick to mock but haven’t said where we can get unbiased quality news from?

[mr.hobblesworth]

Totally reinforces what I said, praising the Guardian. Maybe you should read The Sun and The Mail to balance out some of the crap printed in the Guardian, they are 2 papers just as bad as The Independent and The Guardian but I don’t see anyone keep quoting them.

 

Yeah, I should read The Sun? A 'newspaper' that blamed the Liverpool fans for Hillsborough and tapped the phones of a murdered girl? **** that. The Guardian and The Independent may be a lot of things but it would never do that, nor does it stir up hatred towards minorities. The Mail, as I already stated can't even be used for citations on Wikipedia because its reporting is so unreliable. What would you have me read?

[philpvfc]

So where should we get our news that isn’t crap? The usual suspects are quick to mock but haven’t said where we can get unbiased quality news from?

 

You can get your news from wherever you wish but wherever you do get it from does not always mean it is 100% accurate and if you keep quoting crap from certain tabloids like the Guardian or Independent with total belief it must be true just shows how brain washed you might be.

[philpvfc]

Yeah, I should read The Sun? A 'newspaper' that blamed the Liverpool fans for Hillsborough and tapped the phones of a murdered girl? **** that. The Guardian and The Independent may be a lot of things but it would never do that, nor does it stir up hatred towards minorities. The Mail, as I already stated can't even be used for citations on Wikipedia because its reporting is so unreliable. What would you have me read?

 

Keep on defending the left wing propaganda, and yes it does stir up hatred, you only have to see the amount of hatred in you probably based off what you read.

You claim that Wikipedia banned The Daily Mail which again is not true, yes, it was reported by The Guardian and The Independent that they were banned but they have twisted the truth (fake news). Not that I am going to defend The Mail but yet more evidence you believe everything you read from your fake news papers.

 

https://www.skeptical-science.com/critical-thinking/wikipedia-bans-daily-mail-as-unreliable-source/

[Davebrad]

Yeah, I should read The Sun? A 'newspaper' that blamed the Liverpool fans for Hillsborough and tapped the phones of a murdered girl? **** that. The Guardian and The Independent may be a lot of things but it would never do that, nor does it stir up hatred towards minorities. The Mail, as I already stated can't even be used for citations on Wikipedia because its reporting is so unreliable. What would you have me read?

 

the SPORT...

[mr.hobblesworth]

Keep on defending the left wing propaganda, and yes it does stir up hatred, you only have to see the amount of hatred in you probably based off what you read.

You claim that Wikipedia banned The Daily Mail which again is not true, yes, it was reported by The Guardian and The Independent that they were banned but they have twisted the truth (fake news). Not that I am going to defend The Mail but yet more evidence you believe everything you read from your fake news papers.

 

https://www.skeptical-science.com/critical-thinking/wikipedia-bans-daily-mail-as-unreliable-source/

 

You're lying now. I have never said Wikipedia "banned" the Mail, just that they refuse to use their 'reporting' as evidence. The article you helpfully posted actually supports what I said, so thanks for that.

 

Consensus has determined that the Daily Mail (including its online version, dailymail.co.uk) is generally unreliable, and its use as a reference is to be generally prohibited, especially when other more reliable sources exist. As a result, the Daily Mail should not be used for determining notability, nor should it be used as a source in articles. An edit filter should be put in place going forward to warn editors attempting to use the Daily Mail as a reference.

 

The Guardian and Independent, for all their faults, generally have decent reputations, the former winning a Pulitzer in recent years. The same could never be said of The Mail or The Express. As I've already said, I would look more closely at articles in The Times and the Telegraph but they're hidden behind a paywall. I actually posted a link to a Times article the other day, as well as a report by the NSPCC, but these were both dismissed by the usual as being lefty!

 

My praise for The Guardian's site was because it's user friendly and doesn't hide content or bombard you with video and ads.

[philpvfc]

I don’t want to be seen to defending the Mail because it is as bad as The Guardian but your failure to see that The Guardian is left wing fake news a lot of the time shows your bias. Telegraph and Times are more factual but then again you will always get 2 sides to every story so they may not always be 100% accurate. If you quote a post from any article you will more than likely get a comeback possibly disputing the quote.

Just don’t always believe everything you read and don’t get so worked up about it.

Also, didn’t the Mail win paper of the year?

[mr.hobblesworth]

the Mail is not "as bad as The Guardian", it's far worse. Please show me some evidence. Show me some left leaning headlines that peddle hatred and mistrust to the extent that these do...

 

 

 

Seriously, please show me left wing equivalents of the above. I'll tell you now, you won't be able to.

[philpvfc]

Keep defending the Guardian then!

A lot of those headlines are true, you may not agree with them or want to bury your head in the sand.

 

I’m not sad enough (like you) to go routing through Guardian headlines to prove my point so we will leave it with you and your fake news and your hatred against anyone who disagrees

[mr.hobblesworth]

So, yet again, you can't back up your silly claims. I didn't need to go "routing through" headlines to get those, just an image search for 'mail headlines anti-immigrant' brings up tons of examples. I don't deny that The Guardian can be biased but they don't spew hate and lies like The Sun and The Mail, and that's a fact.

And, for the record, I don't hate you in the slightest.

[ginge]

So, yet again, you can't back up your silly claims. I didn't need to go "routing through" headlines to get those, just an image search for 'mail headlines anti-immigrant' brings up tons of examples. I don't deny that The Guardian can be biased but they don't spew hate and lies like The Sun and The Mail, and that's a fact.

And, for the record, I don't hate you in the slightest.

 

He can't back any of his silly claims with evidence. He claimed i was another user based on no evidence not so long ago.

[Regal Beagle]

It's weird how we constantly hear about the mail peddling hate but it's in fact the moderate left who are far more hateful, intolerant and violent than their right wing equivalents.

 

It seems if you negatively report on immigration you are spreading hate.

 

Classic example of the left not even bothering to debate and rebuke the claims. Their default position is to smear and ultimately silence or shut down opposing views.

 

Something is radicalizing these people. Something is brainwashing them into simultaneously claiming to be so virtuous whilst at the same time making up horrendous lies, smears and in some cases actually inciting violence.

 

It's funny how they berate opposition posters on here for copying and pasting from right wing sources but expect everyone to agree that left wing lies are actually truthful.

 

It's all part of why they're losing. I've said it before and I'll say it again, normal decent people who simply want to go about their business freely can see through the lies.

[mr.hobblesworth]

.....