• @OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      88
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Even for political content it’s damn good. Every time someone on Lemmy points to an explicit article of bias, it falls into one of 3 categories:

      • Slightly unfair bias, but still largely true
      • Article is correct, Lemmy cannot provide a reliable source proving otherwise
      • Article is incorrect, reliable source found, article amended

      The third case happened once in an article about a UN Resolution on North Korea, and it was because the original article source was slightly misinterpreted. But yea, basically what I’m trying to say is if a “political article” is “wrong” but you can’t prove it, it’s not the political article that’s wrong but you.

      Edit: ITT - People upset with my analysis, but not willing to provide sources to the articles they disagree with

        • @commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          32 years ago

          And Wikipedia has an overall left-bias, because of the demographic of contributors.

          FROM YOUR LINK

          Until 2021, we rated Wikipedia as Center, but changed them to Not Rated because the online encyclopedia does not fit neatly into AllSides’ media bias rating methodologies, which were developed specifically for news sites.

      • Nutomic
        link
        fedilink
        4
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        Wikipedia completely slanders people it doesnt like. For example Daniele Ganser who helped to reveal Operation Gladio.