SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
From Breitbart:
Another day, another very fake news story from the network President Donald Trump has identified as "very fake news."
CNN's Thomas Frank on Thursday evening published what would have been considered an explosive report if remotely true: One anonymous source told him both the Treasury Department and Senate Intelligence Committee are probing a Russian investment fund with ties to several senior finance world leaders close to President Trump. Only problem? Both Trump administration officials and those close to Senate GOP leadership say it's simply untrue.
The retraction from CNN:
On June 22, 2017, CNN.com published a story connecting Anthony Scaramucci with investigations into the Russian Direct Investment Fund.
That story did not meet CNN's editorial standards and has been retracted. Links to the story have been disabled. CNN apologizes to Mr. Scaramucci.
According to BuzzFeed News, CNN has responded by actually requiring executives to review stories:
CNN is imposing strict new publishing restrictions for online articles involving Russia after the network deleted a story and then issued a retraction late Friday, according to an internal email obtained by BuzzFeed News.
The email went out at 11:21 a.m. on Saturday from Rich Barbieri, the CNNMoney executive editor, saying "No one should publish any content involving Russia without coming to me and Jason," a CNN vice president.
At least now we'll know who to blame.
[Ed Note: I debated leaving this in politics or dropping it to the main page. I opted for the latter because politics or not, the prevalence of "fake news" is one that we deal with on a daily basis from our respective social media feeds to all the major broadcast and cable news networks. How are we to tell what is "fake" and what is actually (relatively) "true"? The main stream media all put their spin on everything. A right slant for some, a left slant for others. Is the truth somewhere in between, or is it a story that we aren't getting becasue the mainstream media is so intent on telling their narrative that we the people are getting the shit end of the stick regardless of where we get the so called news?]
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Tuesday June 27 2017, @10:28PM (4 children)
Totally ignoring the point that "fake news" is in fact a fake news ploy to attempt to get creedence for deplorable alt-right conspiracy organizations? Or just a way to avoid the "never two political FAs at the same time" rule that an earlier ed failed so miserably at with the "so let's just mash a bunch into one" strategy a short while ago?
Your explanation betrays bias. Unconscious bias, but bias none the less. Anything from Brietbart will not help anyone sort of fake news. Shame on you, ed, shame on you. Good job otherwise, though! Keep up the good work!
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Wednesday June 28 2017, @06:42AM (3 children)
Bad respond to own comment move, but am I right in thinking that all comment moderation has been stopped on SoylentNews? Can it be, that the editorial bias has suddenly found themselves in the minority, and have taken measures to stop that from becoming apparent? Or we just experienced a leap-year, as when we just leap over UTC to the next day without giving any Soylentils the ability to grade comments?
After the whole Spam-mod Incident of 2017, you think Soylent admin would be more careful. But it matters little. Several posters have already declared the site dead, and expressed their sadness at the loss of what could have been a wonderful thing, if not for the alt-right infestation. I myself raised the flag quite a while ago. https://soylentnews.org/~aristarchus/journal/1795 [soylentnews.org] But if that is the way it is going to be, so be it. Not like I needed a Buzzard and a Hillbilly feeding me news.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday June 28 2017, @01:20PM (1 child)
I can still moderate. I don't perceive there's any editorial bias, either. The editors are who volunteers to edit. If people feel there is a lack of balance there, they should volunteer to edit. I'm sure the editors would really appreciate the help, especially over the summer while a lot of people check out.
I did see your journal post, BTW, and it made me sad. You're a pillar of the community. I hope you won't cede the field because you bring so much.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Saturday July 01 2017, @06:10AM
Possibly. I have seen some editor candidates that did not make it, for what ever reasons. Transperancy! The Bias is probably too apparent to be noticed: Here, let me help.
Oh, really? Or is it that a small partisan fringe likes to claim this? Sarah? Sarah Palin? is that you?
False forking equivalency, my dear editor! With emphasis on the _false_! There is no "middle ground" between good faith and mendacity. Pretending there is, is itself mendacity.
So intent, the powers that be, the principalities and the whores upon the Earth! Or maybe, operators like Bannon want to put this seed of doubt in your ear, so that you will listen to the still small voice, of the dark side! Satan is your friend! Do not listen to your former friends and family! The new, secret truth has been revealed to you, because you are one of the few, the chosen the awakened from the lies of liberals and feminists and the deep state! Congratulations. Now, drop trow, and bend over, time for your initiation. The Peter approaches.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 28 2017, @04:01PM
My ability to moderate appears to have vanished today as well. I usually only mod people up. Very occasionally, someone deserving gets a -1 Troll or Flamebait. I am of the opinion that speech should be as free as possible and that views should be aired and countered where required.