yeah, but the moment I label any publication as highly left or highly right, suddenly that is what the argument becomes. People will automatically accept or dismiss the articles based upon whatever 3 word description they hear accompanying it.
I posted the WTC1993 voice recordings of the bomber speaking with FBI head about the bomb construction - yet people dismiss it because it is on a site they deem liberal. I could show them someone from our country standing on one of those little TNT boxes you'd see in cartoons with the plunger detonator, and if it came from anywhere left of FOX, they wouldn't even look at it.
Do you agree that many here will ignore or dismiss evidence or articles not based upon their content, but upon the newspaper/site in which they arrive?
Good point, very good point.
But then, IMO, you really should be a bit more selective when posting articles.
It's not a biggie...
I dunno, I guess I just felt that it would lend to the credibility if the source is shady, then mention it.
Fictious example: If I post an article about how all black people are really low intelligent, it would be fair play to mention that the site that I got the article from, aryansaretehshyte.com, are known for their connections with the KKK or whatever.
At least when posting from unfamiliar extreme sources IMO. No need to post a disclaimer for shit like Limbaugh, Franken, FOX or the mainstream media.
JMO.
I just reacted because I got the impression that the source was a 'regular' alternative news source. Smaller news station.
As I stated, no big deal.
YIP
Zack