this post was submitted on 16 Nov 2024
-33 points (9.8% liked)

Politics Unfiltered

50 readers
22 users here now

A fresh perspective on political news, spotlighting voices and viewpoints beyond the mainstream.

We dive into third-party movements, alternative policies, and underrepresented ideas, offering a space for independent thinking.

Here, diverse political opinions are encouraged, making room for honest discussions about the full spectrum of political possibilities.

founded 1 week ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] UniversalMonk@sh.itjust.works -3 points 2 days ago (6 children)

but Reason magazine isn’t a reputable source

You make a lot of great points, but I disagree about Reason not being a reputable source. I like them.

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 days ago (5 children)

Yes, but that means you're not a reputable source.

[–] UniversalMonk@sh.itjust.works -2 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Well, you are totally welcome to think that. I respect your right to feel that way. But I'll keep posting stuff from Reason, because I like them. Thanks!

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Liking them isn't enough, they should be a reliable source of factual information. They're not. They're incredibly biased and their bias is towards a world view that's absurd. Just because your filter bubble feels good doesn't mean it's not harmful to you.

[–] UniversalMonk@sh.itjust.works -3 points 1 day ago

Liking them isn’t enough, they should be a reliable source of factual information. They’re not.

I happen to think they are pretty reliable, and def not any less reliable than most news orgs. All news orgs are biased.

I don't think anyone on Lemmy can really talk about "filter bubble." I mean, Lemmy is an even bigger filter bubble than reddit! lol

But hey, I like them. I totally get lots of others don't. I'm cool with you thinking that. All good, friend!

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)