Okay, but like, places like AP and Reuters are right there and free. If someone’s thirsty, you shouldn’t point them at a dirty puddle because it’s better than sewage, you should turn the faucet on.
Comment on YSK: When you want to learn the facts on a controversial topic, check Wikipedia
fbmac@lemmy.fbmac.net 8 months agoNo, I didn’t anticipate significant backslash. The criticism of Wikipedia is valid, but I’m comparing it to the raw stream of BS I get on social media, not to an idealistic vision of what wikipedia should be
Maven@lemmy.sdf.org 8 months ago
Aatube@kbin.social 8 months ago
"Raw" news sources don't aggregate though.
Maven@lemmy.sdf.org 8 months ago
Aggregating a biased list of sources is worse than not aggregating at all.
redballooon@lemm.ee 8 months ago
Oh that. Yes in comparison to that even controversial Wikipedia entries are saint like.