this post was submitted on 31 Jul 2024
106 points (97.3% liked)

World News

39004 readers
2572 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Huw Edwards, the BBC's former top news presenter, pleaded guilty Wednesday to three counts of making indecent images of children.

The offences he pleaded guilty to at Westminster Magistrates’ Court in central London during a 26-minute hearing involved images shared on WhatsApp between December 2020 and August 2021.

Edwards has been remanded on bail until a sentencing hearing on Sept. 16. He could face up to 10 years in prison.

The court heard that Edwards, 62, was involved in an online chat with an adult man on the messaging service who sent him 377 sexual images, of which 41 were indecent images of children.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] sensiblepuffin@lemmy.world -1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

If that's really your complaint, then if it's not about Israel or Hamas, then I don't see why we can't use it.

[–] sandbox@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

You don’t see the issue with attaching the political opinion of a single, far- right, pro-zionist guy to every single news story posted?

[–] sensiblepuffin@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Again, the only non-rambling concern I've seen about MBFC is that they are staunchly pro-Israel. What evidence do you have that they're "far-right"? Calling AP center-left is a slight bias shift, but certainly not enough for me to call them far-right.

[–] sandbox@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I’m assuming that you’re American? This is world news. Calling mainstream US media outlets anything approaching left-wing is absolutely farcical.

[–] sensiblepuffin@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

What does it being world news have to do with it? My comment was that if MBFC marks the Associated Press, one of the most neutral news sources in the world alongside perhaps Reuters, as center-left, then naturally you should adjust all their judgments slightly to the right.

[–] sandbox@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, America brained. Reuters is centre-right.

[–] sensiblepuffin@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

You're just proving my point... MBFC marks Reuters as very slightly left of center in terms of bias. If you think that Reuters is actually center-right, then you agree with me. You're clearly either not reading what I'm saying, or trying to push a point, either way I'm done here.

[–] sandbox@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

Sorry, I may have forgotten what we were originally talking about.

If your point is that they reprogram the bot to automatically shift their bias two clicks to the right, I’d be not entirely satisfied by that, but I’d be less annoyed about it.

If you’re suggesting that the solution to a systemic problem is for all of us to individually adjust our perspectives, then I disagree.