So Breitbart is banned because it's "hyperpartisan"? In other words, not because it's factually incorrect, but guilty of wrongthink?
Some Facebook plugins are auto-censoring this right now.
https://archive.is/l375r archived from http://metro.co.uk/2016/11/16/full-list-of-fake-news-sites-to-avoid-6261851/
"‘Watch out if known/reputable news sites are not also reporting on the story"
But that's the problem. All the MSM were reporting things like that Trump was losing the election, and Clinton was moving to Victory, Victory, Victory!
Which means we lose faith in them.
Just as we did when the Elliot Rodgers story broke and the MSM blamed men's rights activists and even GamerGate for his actions. They copied and pasted false information, and refused to acknowledge as they drifted - knowingly - into full on propaganda.
I spoke to a journalist called John Birmingham. He knew what the facts were. He just didn't CARE.
|Zimdars to decide what |
will be allowed to see.
The MSM no longer prints facts, it prints propaganda, which is why their sales are plummeting and people are turning elsewhere. Would it be nice to have some objective body tell us who is factual?
Is Zimdars someone who can be trusted? No evidence has been provided, we have just been told to trust her; but the fact that Buzzfeed-style webpages are not included makes it clear to me she has an agenda, and she wants only her side to be heard, and others to be silenced.
"Teaching: Feminist Media Studies "
archived from http://www.merrimack.edu/live/profiles/586-melissa-mish-zimdars 16 Nov 2016 20:31:51 UTC
And there it is.
She's interested in teaching SocJus, and wants antifeminist websites censored through this back door.
Meet The Leftist Professor Who Wrote The 'Hit List' Of "Fake News" Sites
Why was this fanatical anti-Trump activist given credibility as a neutral arbiter of truth?