this post was submitted on 19 Mar 2025
158 points (97.0% liked)

News

37152 readers
2978 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] arakhis_@feddit.org 14 points 1 year ago (2 children)

is newsweek considered a serious source? even this objectively right seeming headline is kind of a nothingburger, isnt it?

sorry for derailing. if thats not tolerated, i will stop

[–] assaultpotato@sh.itjust.works 15 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Are you thinking of NewsMax or whatever? Newsweek AFAIK is a run-of-the-mill average news source - no NYT but certainly not NY Post.

[–] Sibshops@lemm.ee 16 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Newsveek is no longer considered a reliable source. It was reliable until 2013.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources

[–] assaultpotato@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

That is fair.

IBT Media introduced a number of bad practices to the once reputable magazine and mainly focused on clickbait headlines over quality journalism. Its current relationship with IBT Media is unclear, and Newsweek's quality has not returned to its status prior to the 2013 purchase. Many editors have noted that there are several exceptions to this standard, so consensus is to evaluate Newsweek content on a case-by-case basis.

Lines up with the "nothingburger' headline. Probably case-by-case is appropriate. Thanks for showing me that!

[–] arakhis_@feddit.org 2 points 1 year ago

Oh wow, theres more to this discussion, nicely useful!

says:

evaluate on case-by-case basis

So its kind of in a grey zone, not reliable doesnt mean bad source in that case. Useful link, altough wikipedia is also a grey zone in the sense that its information based on open source (everybody can edit it, and most liked proposals get through as I understand)

[–] arakhis_@feddit.org 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

maybe as European im not too well versed in US sources and judged too harsh based on anecdotal experience. All the news Ive seen are always on the "nothing has been said" or "thats reaching" side.

my bad then

[–] EmpathicVagrant@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You’re on the nose with that, which is why ground.news is so vital especially now. You can read about the same story from multiple perspectives and often they’ll have a handy synopsis that has key info from all the writings.

Or for that matter, see through the flood and read about things that matter a lot more.

[–] arakhis_@feddit.org 3 points 1 year ago

Well what ground news wants to do -critical evaluation and media literacy- is so vital.

But ground news deciding on what exact position on the spectrum a source is, seems to achieve the exact oposite: make people depentend in questioning and finding a variety of sources.

Nowadays everything needs to happen in an instant.

If theres a solution that only takes half a snap, that will be the only relevant choice for the mass. Thats why Im instantly asking, because just today I referred to this source to someone else as a might-be-bad example but instantly realized, I will have to ask this on the next situation (now)

Anyways thanks for the correction!

[–] assaultpotato@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

For the record I can't comment on this specific article - it may be a nothingburger. I just think Newsweek itself is not inherently problematic.

[–] arakhis_@feddit.org 1 points 1 year ago

Thanks for the confirmation

[–] tal@lemmy.today 9 points 1 year ago

Newsweek is kind of lowbrow today compared where it was maybe twenty years ago, IMHO, but I wouldn't call it a source of inaccurate information or anything.