One Political PlazaSM - Home of politics
Speech
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Page: <<prev 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... 39 next>>
Feb 6, 2019 11:44:58   #
bdamage (a regular here)
 
Bad Bob wrote:
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/drudge-report/

QUESTIONABLE SOURCE

A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no sourcing to credible information, a complete lack of transparency and/or is fake news. Fake News is the deliberate attempt to publish hoaxes and/or disinformation for the purpose of profit or influence (Learn More). Sources listed in the Questionable Category may be very untrustworthy and should be fact checked on a per article basis. Please note sources on this list are not considered fake news unless specifically written in the reasoning section for that source. See all

Questionable sources.

Detailed Report
Reasoning: Propaganda, Conspiracies, Poor Sources, Some Fake News
Country: USA
World Press Freedom Rank: USA 45/180
History
Founded in 1995 as one of the first independent web only news sources, The Drudge Report is a politically conservative American news aggregation website run by Matt Drudge. The site consists mainly of links to stories from the United States and international media about politics, entertainment, and

current events; it also has links to many columnists. Occasionally, Drudge authors new stories himself, based on tips. The Drudge Report focuses on sensationalized stories with a right-wing bias. The website is edited by Matt Drudge and Charles Hunt.
Funded by / Analysis
The Drudge Report is owned by Matt Drudge and is funded through online advertising.

Analysis / Bias

In review, the Drudge Report typically provides hyperlinks to external news sources, in which Matt Drudge or Charles Hunt write the lead in headlines. Almost all news stories favor the right and link to right leaning sources.

Frequently, the Drudge Report links to conspiracy sources such as ZeroHedge and Infowars as well as Questionable sources, with very poor fact check records, such as Breitbart, WND and the Gateway Pundit. Drudge Report also publishes columns from right-wing journalists who have poor track records with factual information, such as Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh and Roger Stone.
The Drudge Report has also promoted numerous debunked conspiracy theories such as: The President Obama Birther conspiracy and that Undocumented children are violent criminals.

A factual search reveals a very poor track record with fact checkers. Below is a small sampling:
“Reporters rehearse questions with White House press (secretary).” – PANTS ON FIRE
“Says Los Angeles Clippers owner Donald “Sterling is a Democrat.” – PANTS ON FIRE
A photograph shows children holding guns on the US-Mexico border. – FALSE
Is President Obama’s trip to India going to cost $200 million per day? – FALSE
BREAKING: Illegal Muslim From Iran Arrested For Starting California Wildfire – PANTS ON FIRE

Overall, we rate the Drudge Report Right Biased and Questionable due to promotion of propaganda and conspiracy theories, as well as for publishing fake news and the use of highly questionable sources. (7/19/2016) Updated (D. Van Zandt 1/8/2019)
Source: http://www.drudgereport.com/

www.bswer.com
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/drudge-report/ br ... (show quote)


You haven't shown any PROOF to verify any of these false claims.

Keep diggin' there Bob....even a nut will find a squirrel once in a while.

In the mean time, fact-check this...



| Reply
Feb 6, 2019 11:47:16   #
bdamage (a regular here)
 
slatten49 wrote:
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/2017/02/26/snopes-is-a-least-biased-source-despite-what-you-may-have-read/


Sorry slats....Snopes is bogus.



| Reply
Feb 6, 2019 11:48:37   #
jimpack123 (a regular here)
 
bdamage wrote:
Uh, hey there jimi....it was listed as a CBS poll with a 76% approval rating.

Figure it out yourself dude.

And by the way, I challenge you to prove ANYTHING to be false that Drudge reports.

Maybe this will be more acceptable to you....


Yawn Fake news lol But here's a few Obama gives out free phones when it was started during the bush yrs
and Biden proposes global tax. What I am trying to get at is the Drudge is far reaching to the right you know it and I know it but here is another Media bias / fact check " overall we rate the Drudge report right biased and questionable due to the promotion of propaganda and conspiracy theories, as well for publishing fake news and the use of highly questionable sources" World press Freedom rack USA 45/180 anymore or is that enough for you

| Reply
Feb 6, 2019 11:49:18   #
Sicilianthing (suspended)
 
kemmer wrote:
What the hell's the matter with you?! Stephen Miller wrote that speech. His fingerprints are all over it.


>>>

Idk, I’m seriously disappointed man.

| Reply
Feb 6, 2019 11:55:10   #
slatten49 (a regular here)
 
bdamage wrote:
Sorry slats....Snopes is bogus.

Sorry, my friend, it's okay to disagree...but, I believe you are wrong. I hope you read the entire link you responded to here. In any event, here's a link with built-in evidence of DrudgeReport false claims. Although a bit dated, it serves the purpose for which you asked:

https://thinkprogress.org/10-totally-fake-stories-bannered-by-drudge-this-year-572d72b59a59/

| Reply
Feb 6, 2019 12:04:07   #
slatten49 (a regular here)
 
BTW and for all's information, here's MediaBiasFactCheck on Snopes:

Snopes is a Least Biased Source despite what you may have read

Posted on February 26, 2017, By Dave Van Zandt

We receive about 50 or more contacts per day from people submitting sources to add to the website, fact check requests and complaints and/or suggestions to improve the website. Today, I want to address a complaint that we frequently receive. This complaint involves Snopes. Almost every morning I awaken to a person saying we are wrong to list Snopes as “least biased” because they believe they are extremely liberal. This of course leads to accusations that MBFC is liberally biased. I typically don’t respond to these, but I feel now is the time to address this publicly as it happens daily. By the way, we also get mail accusing us of being extreme right. As I have said on many occasions, I see this as doing a good job. If hate mail only came from one group I would reconsider.

I want to clarify why Snopes is least biased (not unbiased), as to be completely unbiased defies human nature. We all have biases and no matter how hard we try most of us will fall victim to confirmation bias (gravitating toward information that feels right to you even though it might be wrong). I believe confirmation bias plays a huge role in how people perceive fact checkers. I also believe that the right wing media campaign to discredit fact checkers plays a significant role. When I ask people to list credible fact checkers, who are not Snopes, Politifact, Factcheck etc. I never get an answer. My thought is that if these sources are not credible there must be other credible sources. Who are they and what established criteria are they using?

When we evaluate a source we strictly use our methodology that looks at 4 criteria. Every source goes through this process. I want to break down Snopes for you so that you can see how and why it scores least biased by our criteria.

We always evaluate a minimum of 10 articles, or more, if necessary to be accurate. First, we look at wording. This starts by looking at the headlines. Do the headlines have loaded (emotional) words in them? Yes or no? We then move on to compare that the headlines match the actual content of the article. We score on a 0 – 10 scale, with 0 being perfect and 10 being dreadful. This has a subjective component as what might be dreadful to one reviewer might be more tolerable to another. Hence, why we have multiple reviewers. Back to Snopes. On wording and headlines we score Snopes at 0. Their headlines usually just ask a question and do not convey emotion or opinion. The actual content of the article matches the headline without deception. It asks the question and then answers it using sources to support the claim.

Next, we look at how factual/well sourced the articles are. Do they list sources and are they credible? In other words, are they going directly to the source, such as transcripts of what someone said and/or to low biased news agencies such as Reuters etc. On sourcing, Snopes always lists where the info comes from and when they cannot be certain they list the claim as Unproven or Mixed. On factual sourcing we score them 0 again as they are very thorough.

The third step is to look at reporting choices. Does the source report both liberal and conservative view points and do they cover them equally? Snopes fact checks everything. If you go to their page right now you will see they are covering a diverse collection of claims. On story selection we score Snopes a 2. This means that they tend to fact check more conservative claims than liberal, but not by very much. We don’t have a raw total, but a basic scan reveals it is close.

Lastly, we look at their political affiliation. This is pretty much a summary of everything we have learned through the first 3 steps and then factor in research about the people behind the website and also funding. Snopes was founded by David Mikkelson who is a political independent, and the website is funded through advertising and not corporate/political donations. Therefore, we score Snopes a 2 on political affiliation as they do cover more conservative fact checks by a very small margin and funding does not seem to be a factor.

If you add up our scores 0 + 0 + 2 + 2 = 4. and then divide this score by 4 and we get a score of 1. Any score between 0-2 is listed as least biased. Snopes is listed on the left side of least biased by our criteria, but not enough to be considered Left-Center.

I know this will not convince all that Snopes is least biased, but I hope it sheds light on the methodology and why it scores the way it does. I am certain I will have many complaints regarding why many right wing claims are false and that perhaps is another article and there is an explanation for that too.

I am expecting this article will not go over well with some.

| Reply
Feb 6, 2019 12:04:52   #
Bad Bob
 
Bcon wrote:
Now do a fact check on Snopes.com.


https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/?s=Snopes.com.

LEAST BIASED
These sources have minimal bias and use very few loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes). The reporting is factual and usually sourced. These are the most credible media sources. See all Least Biased sources.
Overall, we rate Snopes Least Biased and High for factual reporting based on transparency and proper sourcing of information.

Detailed Report
Factual Reporting: HIGH
Country: USA
World Press Freedom Rank: USA 45/180
History

Founded in 1994 by Barbara and David Mikkelson, Snopes.com, also known as the Urban Legends Reference Pages, was one of the first online fact-checking websites. It is a resource for validating and debunking such stories in American popular culture. Snopes ownership has said that the site receives more complaints of liberal bias than conservative bias, but insists that the same debunking standards are applied to all political claims and urban legends.
Funded by / Ownership

According to their about page, Snopes.com is an independent publication owned by Snopes Media Group. Snopes derives funding from online advertising as well as donations. They fully disclose funding and expenses, as well as listing any donation over $10,000. For example, they list that Facebook paid them $100,000 and the James Randi Educational Foundation awarded them $75,000.

Analysis / Bias

In 2012, FactCheck.org reviewed a sample of Snopes’ responses to political rumors regarding George W. Bush, Sarah Palin, and Barack Obama, and found them to be free from bias in all cases. Critics of the site have made the false claim that the website is funded by billionaire philanthropist George Soros, which has been debunked many times as they are funded through advertising and donations, in which they disclose.

In review, Snopes is a signatory of the International Fact Checking Network (IFCN) that is run by the Poynter Institute. Snopes has been independently verified by the IFCN, which lists its core principles as: “non-partisanship and fairness, transparency of sources, transparency of funding and organization, transparency of methodology, and open and honest corrections policy.” Snopes meets this criteria, along with 50+ other fact checkers world wide. Of note, Media Bias Fact Check only uses IFCN fact checkers when checking claims and evaluating sources.

Snopes always openly sources their information and avoids emotional wording, though they do occasionally publish news stories that offer some opinions. Snopes is frequently accused of liberal bias by some on the right. For example, the Daily Express of the UK and the Daily Caller have both criticized Snopes for fact checks they felt were wrong or biased against the right. According to research performed by Real Clear Politics in the article: Snopes and Editorializing Fact Checks, they determined that out of the six fact checkers working with Facebook,

“that Snopes is the least likely to fact-check matters of opinion.” This is important because opinion is something that cannot be fact checked. The article went on to say “We have found that since we started our project, Snopes has fact-checked opinions only 2 percent of the time. In other words, 98 percent of the time it sticks to matters of verifiable fact. Such an achievement is even more remarkable given that during this period, Snopes has produced the second-most articles of the six fact-checking outfits.”

Finally, MBFC has an article detailing why we rate Snopes least biased that you can view here.
Overall, we rate Snopes Least Biased and High for factual reporting based on transparency and proper sourcing of information. (D. Van Zandt 7/10/2016) Updated (12/6/2018)
Source: http://www.snopes.com/

| Reply
Feb 6, 2019 12:17:49   #
Wonttakeitanymore (a regular here)
 
Someone should have fact checked ovomit! His speeches would have had no words

| Reply
Feb 6, 2019 12:22:34   #
Bad Bob
 
Wonttakeitanymore wrote:
Someone should have fact checked ovomit! His speeches would have had no words


Here ya go DA.

https://www.factcheck.org/person/barack-obama/

| Reply
Feb 6, 2019 12:38:03   #
Curmudgeon
 
Wait a minute! Everything he aid about the economy was a lie or it actually started under Obama, lived there for seven years and is now petering out under Trump. All his so called facts about immigration and the wall are lies. We have the lowest illegal immigration since 1971. Immigrants commit a much lower percentage of crimes than native born Americans do. This clown wouldn't know the truth if it bit him in the ass.

Speech was better than expected because we anticipated nothing.

| Reply
Feb 6, 2019 12:41:05   #
Sicilianthing (suspended)
 
Curmudgeon wrote:
Wait a minute! Everything he aid about the economy was a lie or it actually started under Obama, lived there for seven years and is now petering out under Trump. All his so called facts about immigration and the wall are lies. We have the lowest illegal immigration since 1971. Immigrants commit a much lower percentage of crimes than native born Americans do. This clown wouldn't know the truth if it bit him in the ass.

Speech was better than expected because we anticipated nothing.


>>>

The economy is now heavily fragmented... that’s what they’re not collecting data on.
As for Immigratoin you are very very wrong I’m sorry to inform you of.

Down the rabbit hole we goooooooooo

Weeeeee

Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee



| Reply
Feb 6, 2019 12:53:46   #
debeda (a regular here)
 
Rose42 wrote:
Who fact checks the fact checkers?


Good point

| Reply
Feb 6, 2019 12:54:35   #
debeda (a regular here)
 
lindajoy wrote:
X2, but its to be expected.. What is there they have achieved since taking Congress other than speak of all the investigstions they will bring, Impeaching Trump and Kavanaugh, get Trumps tax records etc...

Do you have any idea what they are doing about our country issues?? Ohhhhh thats right guns and passing horrific Abortion laws... yeaaa baby thats some good legislation on state level democrats... They must be very proud of themselves..,
X2, but its to be expected.. What is there they ha... (show quote)


The party of delusion, for sure

| Reply
Feb 6, 2019 12:54:47   #
bdamage (a regular here)
 
slatten49 wrote:
Sorry, my friend, it's okay to disagree...but, I believe you are wrong. I hope you read the entire link you responded to here. In any event, here's a link with built-in evidence of DrudgeReport false claims. Although a bit dated, it serves the purpose for which you asked:

https://thinkprogress.org/10-totally-fake-stories-bannered-by-drudge-this-year-572d72b59a59/


All these left wing outfits are doing is patting each other on the back and supporting their side.

Thinkprogress is a left wing cheering section.

Don't get fooled my friend.



ThinkProgress media bias rating is Left.

ThinkProgress bias rating is Left. ThinkProgress is an American political blog and a project of the Center for American Progress, a progressive public policy research and advocacy organization.
https://www.allsides.com/news-source/thinkprogress-bias

| Reply
Feb 6, 2019 13:01:50   #
Bad Bob
 
Curmudgeon wrote:
Wait a minute! Everything he aid about the economy was a lie or it actually started under Obama, lived there for seven years and is now petering out under Trump. All his so called facts about immigration and the wall are lies. We have the lowest illegal immigration since 1971. Immigrants commit a much lower percentage of crimes than native born Americans do. This clown wouldn't know the truth if it bit him in the ass.

Speech was better than expected because we anticipated nothing.



| Reply
Page: <<prev 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... 39 next>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2019 IDF International Technologies, Inc.