NATO is the US’s main military foothold in Europe. And considering the Nazis explicitly emulated their conquest for lebensraum in eastern Europe on the colonialist manifest destiny project of the US, its not hard to see why NATO not only early on, but even now, would continue to work with white supremacists.
Its more accurate to say that NATO exists to continue upholding the interests of US and European capital.
On Media Bias/Fact Check, The Grayzone is still pending evaluation, but is marked as a news outlet that publishes conspiracy and pseudoscience, although being a premature labeling. Of course, we should wait for a full review
Sorry bro, but I can’t trust Swiss Policy Research with what they say, being that they’re not transparent with their work. I’m sure you’ve read “Criticism of SPR” at the bottom of their About Us / Contact page
How exactly do you trust that site more than any other site that claims to be impartial? Huge news outlets that tout themselves as being objective and unbiased like the Guardian, Independent, AP, etc have been called out for anti-far-left fake news so what makes this site so special?
I wouldn’t say special, I just mentioned a fairly credible fact-checking website, but I might be wrong as others sites can review the news outlet, or have already.
Also: here, here and here are MB/FC’s reviews on those outlets you mentioned, updated this March
Strongly suggest you consider doing your own critical thinking on every issue and news source rather than relying on another website to tell you how to think about a media source. These fact verifying sites and news bias identifiers are only good for reinforcing internet arguments with ad hominem fallacy and wasting peoples time. There are good and bad stories in a pro imperial NYT and anti imperial Grayzone. Please read the article, think critically about it, then form an opinion.
Yes, I will. I’m constantly looking for the best way to be informed about current events without bs. Thank you for the suggestion, can you please give me an alternative to fact-checkers, which seem to give empirical evidence on events portrayed by media?
My recommendation would be if there’s a political issue being portrayed in the media with a specific slant (usually it starts with the headline), to then search using Metager, Qwant, or Google for a media outlet from the country in question or source to see how they’re spinning the same issue. The truth usually lies somewhere in the middle.
For example, if you’re reading an article about China in western media, read about the same issue in Xinhua or CGTN to see what they say. Then critically assess both sides, and form an opinion. Pretend you’re working for the UN maybe.
Likewise, if you read a story about US politics that is pro democrat, read the same article from a fox news or The Hill perspective. It’ll be pretty clear the Fox news (right wing) perspective is filled with logical fallacies but it still allows you to think critically and form your own opinion.
You might also consider reading up on political economy perspectives on an issue or a country to see where their interests, and ergo, media bias lies. USA media is pro-USA. USA is an imperial nation with hegemonic interests around the world. USA media will always report international events with the USA being the good guy.
I like Le Monde Diplomatique English Edition to get political economy perspectives on a country’s current affairs, you might find it educations.
Alternatively, find academic bloggers who are experts in a region that share their opinions on current events to get a more nuanced perspective. The “Irussianality Blog” for example is written by a Canadian professor of eastern European studies.
This is all really cool thanks for the advice. I should be applying it more because I risk falling into the same news that just few publishers give, ignoring others.
I’ll keep an eye to all these you mentioned. Really grateful thanks, if you have any other suggestion, I’ll be glad to hear
There are some proponents I am seeing pushing MBFC and Snopes hard here on Lemmy now, with this weird influx of Western neoliberal biased news articles shared. Very sus.
It’s entirely possible Lemmy is being seen as a potential anti-establishment platform and having one or two trolls assigned to the platform is worth the hours. Soferman says he works in communications could mean he sidegigs for a Pro-US troll farm.
Well I would not go on that far, but he is in a certain echo chamber and I can tell what it is, from experience. It is a very similar story to my Indian liberal/libertarian family.
It’s basically like hearing from a nazi talking about the labour party. Instead they’ll talk about how for example NATO works to undermind the white race. You grose me out, you and all the other disgusting people that propel this kind of shit on Lemmy. I don’t know how things are socially for you with these things, maybe you never talk about it with people you know IRL.
I literally showed you 2 nazi generals who helped found NATO, and showed you multiple examples of todays NATO glorifying nazis. How on earth can you possibly defend this?
Correlation and causation are mathematical concepts relating to a set of numeric data. It doesn’t apply when the organization in question has literally been caught praising prominant Nazis, AND had Nazi founders. That’s not correlation, that’s them doing stuff.
That’s not a factual comment. At least provide proper sources apart from some Wikipedia screenshots and a far-left tabloid website. You’re countering one extremist viewpoint with another, which is… interesting.
Well, then they’d be looking in my eye and see my face. But they’d be exposed as well. It’s one thing to write stuff in chat or in a comment section, but when you meet a real person it’s gonna be different.
(The way you wrote just seemed like you didn’t know what it was to me. I’m not a native english speaker)
Yes and “looking into the face” is some Wild West cowboy shit you have in your head. Cleanse it off. It is illogical and you can exchange arguments either way online.
Good work. Now majority of NATO countries are social nazists that want to restore the third reich, pretty logical stuff
NATO is the US’s main military foothold in Europe. And considering the Nazis explicitly emulated their conquest for lebensraum in eastern Europe on the colonialist manifest destiny project of the US, its not hard to see why NATO not only early on, but even now, would continue to work with white supremacists.
Its more accurate to say that NATO exists to continue upholding the interests of US and European capital.
Some of NATOs recent hits:
On Media Bias/Fact Check, The Grayzone is still pending evaluation, but is marked as a news outlet that publishes conspiracy and pseudoscience, although being a premature labeling. Of course, we should wait for a full review
A larger / better study of bias in media.
The propaganda multiplier
Sorry bro, but I can’t trust Swiss Policy Research with what they say, being that they’re not transparent with their work. I’m sure you’ve read “Criticism of SPR” at the bottom of their About Us / Contact page
Sorry bro, I will trust what I am brainwashed into. Fuck logic. - Torquatus
Whatever you say man
How exactly do you trust that site more than any other site that claims to be impartial? Huge news outlets that tout themselves as being objective and unbiased like the Guardian, Independent, AP, etc have been called out for anti-far-left fake news so what makes this site so special?
I wouldn’t say special, I just mentioned a fairly credible fact-checking website, but I might be wrong as others sites can review the news outlet, or have already.
Also: here, here and here are MB/FC’s reviews on those outlets you mentioned, updated this March
Strongly suggest you consider doing your own critical thinking on every issue and news source rather than relying on another website to tell you how to think about a media source. These fact verifying sites and news bias identifiers are only good for reinforcing internet arguments with ad hominem fallacy and wasting peoples time. There are good and bad stories in a pro imperial NYT and anti imperial Grayzone. Please read the article, think critically about it, then form an opinion.
Yes, I will. I’m constantly looking for the best way to be informed about current events without bs. Thank you for the suggestion, can you please give me an alternative to fact-checkers, which seem to give empirical evidence on events portrayed by media?
My recommendation would be if there’s a political issue being portrayed in the media with a specific slant (usually it starts with the headline), to then search using Metager, Qwant, or Google for a media outlet from the country in question or source to see how they’re spinning the same issue. The truth usually lies somewhere in the middle.
For example, if you’re reading an article about China in western media, read about the same issue in Xinhua or CGTN to see what they say. Then critically assess both sides, and form an opinion. Pretend you’re working for the UN maybe. Likewise, if you read a story about US politics that is pro democrat, read the same article from a fox news or The Hill perspective. It’ll be pretty clear the Fox news (right wing) perspective is filled with logical fallacies but it still allows you to think critically and form your own opinion.
You might also consider reading up on political economy perspectives on an issue or a country to see where their interests, and ergo, media bias lies. USA media is pro-USA. USA is an imperial nation with hegemonic interests around the world. USA media will always report international events with the USA being the good guy. I like Le Monde Diplomatique English Edition to get political economy perspectives on a country’s current affairs, you might find it educations.
Alternatively, find academic bloggers who are experts in a region that share their opinions on current events to get a more nuanced perspective. The “Irussianality Blog” for example is written by a Canadian professor of eastern European studies.
This is all really cool thanks for the advice. I should be applying it more because I risk falling into the same news that just few publishers give, ignoring others.
I’ll keep an eye to all these you mentioned. Really grateful thanks, if you have any other suggestion, I’ll be glad to hear
There are some proponents I am seeing pushing MBFC and Snopes hard here on Lemmy now, with this weird influx of Western neoliberal biased news articles shared. Very sus.
It’s entirely possible Lemmy is being seen as a potential anti-establishment platform and having one or two trolls assigned to the platform is worth the hours. Soferman says he works in communications could mean he sidegigs for a Pro-US troll farm.
Well I would not go on that far, but he is in a certain echo chamber and I can tell what it is, from experience. It is a very similar story to my Indian liberal/libertarian family.
It’s basically like hearing from a nazi talking about the labour party. Instead they’ll talk about how for example NATO works to undermind the white race. You grose me out, you and all the other disgusting people that propel this kind of shit on Lemmy. I don’t know how things are socially for you with these things, maybe you never talk about it with people you know IRL.
I literally showed you 2 nazi generals who helped found NATO, and showed you multiple examples of todays NATO glorifying nazis. How on earth can you possibly defend this?
Because this and that doesn*t mean thismakes this and that. Basic level stuff like ‘correlation doesn’t mean causation’ type of meme.
Correlation and causation are mathematical concepts relating to a set of numeric data. It doesn’t apply when the organization in question has literally been caught praising prominant Nazis, AND had Nazi founders. That’s not correlation, that’s them doing stuff.
Good you have logic on your side
I do wonder if you give the same benefit of the doubt for non-Western countries, like China. Or Belarus.
@[email protected]
Can I talk with you over Jitsi. I wanna talk to you face to face. I’d love to do it.
No, go defend NATO to someone ignorant of its history. There’s nothing I could possibly learn from you.
That’s not a factual comment. At least provide proper sources apart from some Wikipedia screenshots and a far-left tabloid website. You’re countering one extremist viewpoint with another, which is… interesting.
I’ll respect that. I’m not looking to change your mind anyway, just wanted to talk to you face to face while explaining the stuff.
Why the hell are you challenging him face to face instead of maybe XMPP or Matrix or heck even here on Lemmy in real time?
This is jitsi https://jitsi.org/
I am a FOSS advocate. I run [email protected] and r/privatelife on reddit. I know what Jitsi is.
You are telling them for some reason to bring their face on camera. What will that prove? Can you specify that?
Well, then they’d be looking in my eye and see my face. But they’d be exposed as well. It’s one thing to write stuff in chat or in a comment section, but when you meet a real person it’s gonna be different.
(The way you wrote just seemed like you didn’t know what it was to me. I’m not a native english speaker)
Yes and “looking into the face” is some Wild West cowboy shit you have in your head. Cleanse it off. It is illogical and you can exchange arguments either way online.