1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to [email protected]
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
I don't trust any single source! That's why I make sure to get my news from multiple different Lemmy instances.
The most hilarious part is that Ground News tries to present itself as "unbiased" by covering news from "left" and "right", but it does so from a US perspective, so almost all international sources are considered "left".
They are not left, it's you who is right, lol.
Which, BTW, highlights the broader issue of American politics, which is that people were honestly made to believe moderate right is the center, or even left. It is not.
You're 100% correct. It is considered unbiased in the US because where they put the center line is based on a US customer base.
My friends considered me to be far left, but in any other country I think I would be considered center left.
Our Overton window has been sprinting right for 40 years at least. Our left wing is now just conservatives that don't hate people.
Ground news is pretty dope and the only people hating on it seem to be the people that have never used it, but thinks that it's automatically bad because of the whole left/right thing.
It's still a place to consume a large amount of news very quickly and at a glance you can see if one side isn't reporting on something or if they are reporting on it using very different language or focusing on different aspects on the topic.
Nothing will ever be perfect, but as the saying goes the enemy of perfect is good.
I've tried it and I absolutely do not trust it.
And them covering left and right is part of it, yes. It works with made up American definitions of left and right, in which centrists to moderate rights are put on the left. As a result, international coverage is normally represented as left-biased, while really, Ground News and a broader American political landscape is right-biased. This is not a fair coverage and it and it doesn't allow you to break through the propaganda.
Overall, concept is good, but if you follow this and think you are well-balanced and informed, you are not.
You forgot to mention that your personal favorite feature is the blind spot feature so I suspect you weren't paid for saying this.
What if I was paid and this was actually just 4d chess guerilla marketing?
JK I wish I was getting paid to say shit like that.
Shit I would do an ad read for the Taliban if it would get me outta financial prison.
I don't understand why someone would hate that they show both sides? Like, I'm not a centrist or right winger by any means, but it's good to get out of the echo chamber sometimes. Everyone needs to be more critical of the media they consume and realize that not everyone thinks the same way they do. I don't agree with the way the right reports on things, but I want to at least know what I'm not hearing that other people are.
If more people read more news sources, we wouldn't still have people spouting that "transgenic/transgender" mixup
That's a very healthy mindset to have. Too many people happily lock themselves into many bubbles/echo chambers and they lose all perspective. Just because you discuss topics with people doesn'tean you have to agree with them. It's still important to know what other views exist out there.
I wish more people were like you.
I haven't used it, mainly because I suspect they're very caught up in the political landscape of the US. I don't know what to do with a scale that only goes from "you may have some civil liberties as a treat, but only if they don't affect stock prices" to "if you're not a rich white hetero man I don't care if you live or die"
I mean, of the possible sponsors out there, Ground News is pretty alright. I don’t particularly need another subscription, but it seems like a valuable enough service
It's also very usable even without the subscription and doesn't have (its own) ads. Just use ad block if you want to actually read any of the articles.
It doesn't provide any real benefit other than letting you know whether a news site is "left" or "right" leaning. Which is a massive false dichotomy used to divide people.
I prefer objective truth myself.
Where is your source of objective truth?
snopes or something
I wait for it to become so important that it ends up in the meme and shitpost communities.
Back in the day my primary source of news was World of Warcraft. If it was important enough to matter it would show up in the game. If it wasn't any way inconsequential I never heard of it.
I only get all my news and current events from Raid shadow legends! Or the Hoyoverse whatever the fuck that is.
I get my news audibly through Raycons
I get mine through the team chat of War Thunder! Enter the code TRTHMNSTRY and receive the special ammo full of facts to shoot straight into your enemies' face!
I’m too busy slamming AG1 to consume news.
An officoanado of the Cody showdy.
U guys are seeing sponsors? And don't have sponsor block?
With some YouTubers I'm the one who usually submits to sponsor block 🤷♂️ Also, that's not an option on a tv.
Depends on your TV. If it's software is android based, there are aps available if you don't mind sideloading. Though I would recommend using something like a firestick to minimize the risk.
Why use sponsor block? I want to know what sponsors my videos have, because if I see a "Honey" or a "Betterhelp" I'm gonna close the video.
With honey the youtuber was actually the victim, so I wouldn't judge them too harshly for that one. Small channels don't have the flexibility to pick whatever sponsor they like. They're just trying to get by.
Yeah, with a couple of podcasts I listen to, when the Honey stuff came out they did a whole thing about it and dropped Honey mid cycle, probably at a pretty big cost to themselves.
It still mildly irritates me because I had suspected they were doing this for a long time, but I can't really fault the podcasts I listen to for how they handled it.
All the worst sponsors also require a link in description and/or pinned comment so you can know either way.
I use yt to watch content not to express my political or ideological preferences. My goal is to watch as much content per second possible hence adblock sponsorblock and 2.5 speed.
Ground News aggregates articles from many sources on a single topic and it tells you whether or not each source tends to lean right or left. I think it even tells you if any of those sources leaves out certain pieces of information. It's actually pretty sweet.
Just annoying how it adds all the affiliates to different biases. Like, ok, maybe each has their own commentary but no, it's just the same reposted blurb.
Ground news is no more a news source then an RSS reader is. It just also happens to catagoeize the sources as left or right which helps if you want to actually know what people outside of your personal bubble are reading.
Yeah, it isn't a single source at all. It's an algamation of all new sources so you can see the spin from all sides
It's literally the opposite of a single news source
Ublock Origin in Firefox is my choice among all possible 'sponsors.'