89

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/23066599

Since 2017, Wikipedia editors have compiled a list of news sources from which articles are highly likely to employ systematic bias, lack professional editing and/or journalistic standards, regularly misrepresent sources, and/or fabricate information.

While its list is by no means a complete list of publications with the aforementioned problems, it has helped make Wikipedia articles more reliable by basing them off of sources covering the same events and information from a less biased point of view.

To make Lemmy news communities better than their Reddit counterparts, I think avoiding links to those sources in favor of more reliable alternatives would be worthwhile.

top 15 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 29 points 2 days ago

Whether or not that becomes official policy in this community, that is a terrific resource I have never seen before, so thank you!

[-] gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago

I don't like this proposal, but I would love a bot that automatically comments with a link to this Wikipedia page anytime something from one of these sites gets posted here

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

I really would be fine with the proposal. I see no reason why a site like the Epoch Times should be allowed here when their articles are just blatant propaganda and usually also false.

[-] gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Because when some false and propagandizing crap from the Epoch Times starts blowing up on telegram or twitter or facebook or wherever I'd like to be able to come to this community and find a comment pointing out the lies and bullshit (ideally with links to sources) that I can up vote here and copy and paste to where it's needed

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

I don't think this is about commenting. It's about posting.

I don't think anyone is suggesting barring them from comments within posts, are they?

[-] gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

I should re-phrase - I'd like to be able to scroll through this community's posts sorted by controversial or new, find a downvoted to hell (as it should be) Epoch Times article that's getting positive traction on other sites (or even other Lemmy instances), and find within the comments on that post one pointing out why the article/source is bullshit that I can copy and paste elsewhere. Searching through comments is a pain on my preferred mobile app (idk about the desktop web interface, but I can't imagine it's a lot better), and it would be just about impossible to know which post's comments would have the comment saying "oh, btw the Epoch Times is out with some fresh nonsense this morning, they're claiming x y and z, but in reality a b and c".

[-] ptz@dubvee.org 11 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Thanks for this.

FYI: The Tesseract UI puts MBFC badges on posts with their bias/credbility ratings and provides a short report and link to the full report on their site.

I wonder how hard it would be to pull this list into a JSON file to use as an additional reference?

[-] gedaliyah@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

Thanks to your support in sharing this method, it is being employed by the moderation team. A bot scans for new posts and notifies the mods if there is a low credibility rating. We do not currently use bots to take any direct action on this basis.

[-] gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

A bot scans for new posts and notifies the mods if there is a low credibility rating.

Could it leave a comment visible to the general community on the article in question alerting the rest of us to low credibility sources?

[-] Zedstrian@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 2 days ago

For those worried about blocking certain viewpoints, it's important to note that the sources on the list aren't there for the unpopularity of their opinions, but rather the frequent publication of misinformation. For instance, Fox News, despite its frequent bias, is not one of the publications on the list.

As others have noted, the list can essentially be summarized as state-sponsored, tabloid, and extremist media outlets that, intentionally or not, have editing standards that result in misinformation on a regular basis.

[-] zenharbinger@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago

Interesting to see last.fm, am I missing something?

[-] Zedstrian@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

In that case the issue is that it's user generated content. Just as you'd cite the references listed after a Wikipedia article for the source of that information rather than Wikipedia itself, Wikipedia policy favors references to established publications over those compiled by users in a manner similar to Wikipedia itself.

For the information to be verifiable, its original source has to be both clear and reputable.

[-] exu@feditown.com 6 points 2 days ago

According to the linked RFC it's due to the site's user generated content. I guess that's an understandable policy for Wikipedia.

[-] gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

Banning from this community won't make them disappear from site like facebook and twitter that have millions of more visitors, but it will keep people in this community from seeing the kinds of things facebook and twitter users see.

Bad articles from bad sources are a problem that should be solved by an intelligent and active community that downvotes and leaves comments pointing out the article and/or source's weakness. If the moderators don't think we have a strong enough community for that this might be necessary, but I don't think it is.

this post was submitted on 28 Jun 2024
89 points (81.1% liked)

News

21687 readers
3091 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS