Ahh so you’re critical to the USA when it affects Norway’s sovereignty, but not other nations sovereignty?

I don’t have the time to search out unbiased alternative perspectives unfortunately. Similar to macro issue of people who are paid to spread propaganda can devote time to influencing public opinion.

You’ve said the same things about the other side of stories you’re sharing on here.

It’s coming off as western propaganda spam posting. I’d appreciate it if you only shared one or two articles you found insightful rather than 5+ articles a day on what you’ve read. I already have an RSS feed thanks.

K this is just spam now.

You’re over generalizing and why do you post several articles here a day anyway out of curiosity?

You might be right. I watched The Dissident recently and it made me realize how many countries pay people to just comment things on the internet to try to away public opinion though. Why this guy is posting pro imperial news articles on a site that is anti imperial is really
weird. He’s an evangelical out of the goodness of his heart? One or two maybe but he spams the site every day with anti-russian and anti-chinese articles. Who does that and why?

Strawmen fallacy, I’m not an anarcho communist.

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.

So you must know then that media outlets contain geopolitical bias?

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.

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.

It’s tempting

Actually no nm I’ll concede for the moment. I’m trying to stay quasi-anonymous with this account and I don’t trust you not to take a screenshot/record me because I hold unpopular political views in the West.

Bet. You’re in Norway? In four hours work?

Ahhhhh nice! Got you! Hahahaha there it is!

I’m critical of western media when it reports on global south countries like Colombia, Venezuela, Russia, China, Syria, Iraq, etc. Because they usually take the stance that countries exercising their sovereign right to control their own resources are run by dictators that restrict the free market. Usually this means to demonize countries that harm the business interests of North American or European multinationals.

It’s objectively a club of exclusively majority white nations (+ Turkey) using their military to bomb non-white dominant nations for the past 60 years. Many of their countries have or have had far right political parties (Poland, Greece, USA, etc.) in political power during its tenure. How are you not seeing this as a white supremacist organization? Do you actually take what they say at face value?

Are you just spamming Pro-imperialist Reuters articles in World News?

And you’d defend NATO any way you can too, what’s your point? Are you a war hawk?