Zedstrian

joined 2 years ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] Zedstrian@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Note that the sources on the list are there due to the frequent publication of misinformation, rather than their bias alone.

As others have noted, the list can essentially be broken down into three categories: state-sponsored media outlets, clickbait-style tabloids, and extremist media outlets.

The categories themselves are just a means of summarizing what's on the list though, as outlets in those categories that maintain editorial standards that disallow misinformation wouldn't qualify for inclusion on the list.

[–] Zedstrian@lemmy.dbzer0.com 31 points 1 year ago

For those worried about blocking certain viewpoints, it's important to note that the sources on the list aren't there for the unpopularity of their opinions, but rather the frequent publication of misinformation. For instance, Fox News, despite its frequent bias, is not one of the publications on the list.

As others have noted, the list can essentially be summarized as state-sponsored, tabloid, and extremist media outlets that, intentionally or not, have editing standards that result in misinformation on a regular basis.

[–] Zedstrian@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 1 year ago

For those worried about blocking certain viewpoints, it's important to note that the sources on the list aren't there for the unpopularity of their opinions, but rather the frequent publication of misinformation. For instance, Fox News, despite its frequent bias, is not one of the publications on the list.

As others have noted, the list can essentially be summarized as state-sponsored, tabloid, and extremist media outlets that, intentionally or not, have editing standards that result in misinformation on a regular basis.

[–] Zedstrian@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 1 year ago

Note that the sources on the list are there due to the frequent publication of misinformation, rather than their bias alone. As others have noted, the list can essentially be broken down into three categories: state-sponsored media outlets, clickbait-style tabloids, and extremist media outlets. The categories themselves are just a means of summarizing what's on the list though, as outlets in those categories that maintain editorial standards that disallow misinformation wouldn't qualify for inclusion on the list.

[–] Zedstrian@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Apologies; fixed it in the main post, so the crossposts should be fixed as well now.

[–] Zedstrian@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 1 year ago

For those worried about blocking certain viewpoints, it's important to note that the sources on the list aren't there for the unpopularity of their opinions, but rather the frequent publication of misinformation. For instance, Fox News, despite its frequent bias, is not one of the publications on the list.

[–] Zedstrian@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 year ago

Didn't realize that; interesting to know, thanks.

[–] Zedstrian@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

In that case the issue is that it's user generated content. Just as you'd cite the references listed after a Wikipedia article for the source of that information rather than Wikipedia itself, Wikipedia policy favors references to established publications over those compiled by users in a manner similar to Wikipedia itself.

For the information to be verifiable, its original source has to be both clear and reputable.

[–] Zedstrian@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 1 year ago

The reason the list is relatively short, in comparison to how many websites likely fall under its scope, is because adding entries to it requires the consensus of dozens or hundreds of Wikipedia editors, and only if that unreliability is consistent. Notably the list doesn't exclude some questionably reliable sources, such as Fox News, as its purpose isn't to remove sources of bias, rather sources of misinformation.

[–] Zedstrian@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

I get the damage to the thumbs, but what in being a scribe would cause more damage to the jaw or hips than anyone else?

[–] Zedstrian@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 year ago

Admittedly I did need a guide at times for Quern too; I think the best compromise is what Cyan did for Firmament and just include an optional hint system in the game itself. By avoiding the need to consult walkthroughs, not only would excessive spoilers be avoided, but the experience would remain self-contained, something especially important for a VR game.

[–] Zedstrian@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Something they didn't fix for the Myst remake that the Myst-like Quern is much better at is not making puzzles so obscure as to essentially require a guide to complete the game. Was anything done about that problem for the Riven remake?

view more: ‹ prev next ›