I don’t think it will in the short term since Russia needs allies and the West has made it clear they will never be allies with Russia. Russia doesn’t gain anything by splitting with China now or in the short term.

Much longer term it was always bound to happen. Russia only gets critical support around here because it’s going against the West in this specific conflict. It’s still a capitalist country with reactionary views on a lot of things.

That’s going to eventually put it at odds with China and other AES countries unless there’s a change in power in Russia.

I get the hesitation since in US politics they often get conflated and I can’t say I’ve followed him very closely but someone else shared this. I know he’s also advocating for city owned grocery stores.

Nowhere in this meme does it say that “both sides are the same”. It’s (correctly) showing how both parties don’t give a shit about the working class.

Republicans are horrible but you can’t expect the Democrats to save or help you from them after we have tons of evidence showing they will also break strikes, pass right wing immigration laws, attack protesters, support genocide, and do almost nothing to stop rising fascism.

Also trying to diminish supplying and funding a genocide to just “a single foreign policy issue” is pretty fucked up and not even accurate. Leftists were willing to overlook hundreds of issues we had with Kamala as a candidate if she could just do the bare fucking minimum of not actively funding and supplying a genocide and she couldn’t even do that.

Heartbreaking, the fact that Israel continues to murder journalists and civilians with no restraint while the world just stands by thanks to Amerikkka backing them is infuriating.

Those organizations specifically? Not much, the major powers within them have always had a level of veto or other powers that effectively make them untouchable.

The other major powers, like China have to counter us more directly since we’ll likely see international orgs slowly become more inept as this country goes more mask off with its facism and imperialism.

Gotta say I really appreciate that you do this. I try to varying degrees when I have the time since like you said it’s usually so lurkers can have their minds changed but it can be time consuming.

It’s really nice when others are jumping in to help and I see you posting great takes a ton.

The text of the deal prevents Hezbollah from carrying out “any operations” against Israel, but it states that Israel will refrain from “any offensive military operations” against Lebanese targets. “It’s kind of a bit insidious where they say ‘offensive,’ meaning somehow there’s this little kind of wiggle room for what they will interpret as defensive, which in Israeli logic and discourse and action means anything,” Makdisi said. “Anything can happen. They can say, ‘Well, this is defense.’ Even the genocide in Gaza, as far as they’re saying, is defensive.” Both Netanyahu and Biden emphasized that the ceasefire was conditioned on the principle that Israel would not be bound by the same rules as Lebanon. “Let me be clear: If Hezbollah or anyone else breaks the deal and poses a direct threat to Israel, then Israel retains the right to self-defense consistent with international law, just like any country when facing a terrorist group pledged to that country’s destruction,” Biden said. He offered no comment on the rights of the Lebanese to protect themselves from Israeli violations or direct threats to their security.

Yeah very little chance this lasts long since Israel has stated everything they do is “defensive”. Murdering unarmed children, bombing hospitals, a literal genocide is all “defensive” to them.

The report documents how Israel’s extensive bombing campaign in Gaza has decimated essential services and unleashed an environmental catastrophe that will have lasting health impacts. By early 2024, over 25,000 tons of explosives—equivalent to two nuclear bombs—had been dropped on Gaza, causing massive destruction and the collapse of water and sanitation systems, agricultural devastation, and toxic pollution.

I knew it was a lot but the equivalent of 2 nukes really puts it into perspective.

Biden has had literally all the evidence you could need to trigger the Leahy Laws and stop the arms shipments but has been complicit in this the entire time.

Not really, if you read my other comment they’re actual journalists that have a solid history of good reporting.

They started this spin off of the intercept project relatively recently so that’s probably why.

Not sure on the down votes but my guess is that you mentioned the media bias sites and people would rather you come to your own conclusions based on the sources history kinda like you ended up doing by looking up the creators instead of relying on those sites.

I personally stopped interacting with the .worlds world news community after they forced the clearly biased mb/fc bot on everyone despite a lot of complaints.

On the about section of drop site news page:

Founded by Ryan Grim, Jeremy Scahill, and veterans of The Intercept.

Feel free to look them up they do good work.

Going to add this report from Amnesty International back in 2009 showing Israel is the one using human shields

Like I kinda said in my last paragraphs you’ve got fair points that it may be good enough for what it’s being used for here (despite it’s clear biases) since it’s not being used to disallow posts. Although other commenters have said it has a pro-Zionist bias as well which is honestly more concerning than things I’ve pointed out. Haven’t had time to check beyond the ADL one.

Overall my main issue is the community wasn’t really asked if one was desired, which one should be used, how it should be used, etc. Because of that and the lack of good response by the poster I’ve already decided to follow other world news communities instead of this one.

Thank you! I know they only recently spun off from the intercept with this, so I believe a website is on the way but will try not to post from here until then unless it’s some unique reporting I’m not seeing on any actual websites.

I think the importance of American bias is overstated. What matters is that they’re transparent about it. That bias also impacts the least important thing they track.

It affects the overall credibility rating of the source, how is that the least important thing? They also seem to let it affect the factual reporting rating despite not clearly stating that in the methodology.

Based on MBFC’s [methodology](https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/methodology/), it’s actually impossible for editorial bias alone to impact the credibility rating without having additional problems

This is only true specifically when you’re thinking about it as a great source can’t have its credibility rating lowered. A not great factual source can get a high credibility rating if it’s deemed centrist enough which again is arbitrary based on the (effectively) 1 guys personal opinion.

High Credibility Score Requirement: 6

Example 1

Factual Reporting Mixed: 1

No left/right bias: 3

Traffic High: 2

Example 2

Factual Reporting Mostly Factual: 2

No left/right bias: 3

Traffic Medium: 1

See how weighing credibility on a (skewed) left/right bias metric waters this down? Both of these examples would get high credibility.

On top of that, none of this impacts this community at all. It could be a problem if the standard here was ‘highest’ ratings exclusively, but it isn’t.

That’s a fair point and I did state in my original post that despite my own feelings I’d be open to something like this if the community had been more involved in the process of choosing one/deciding one is necessary and also if we had the bots post clearly call out it’s biases, maybe an explanation of its methodology and the inherent risks in it.

The way it’s been pushed from the mod first without polling the community and seeing the reaction to criticism some of which was constructive is my main issue here really.

I’m not going to die on the intercept hill here I’m fine with the fact that even though they fired the person it’s a stain on their record so sure let’s say that rating is fine.

It was one of the first 3 I checked so I’m sure I’ll find more that are problematic when I have a chance to look because it’s their methodology that’s biased. Also the other 2 I pointed out are clearly not correct.

Got rebuttals for any of my criticisms about the methodology?

What you’re basically saying, perhaps without realizing it, is that bias ratings shouldn’t be given at all.

What I’m saying is that on a world news community we shouldn’t be using a US based left/right. What that should be should be voted on by the community if the mods insist we need to have some sort of fact checker like this which I disagree is needed.

I don’t know why FAIR is being rated as “High” instead of “Very High” by MB/FC but I don’t see this as some kind of overwhelming issue. The Intercept ranking has an explanation in the report and you should read it but it comes down to the fact that they’re known to only cover certain stories, they’re known to repress journalists, and they’ve been previously caught with writers that were making stuff up. Despite all of that they’re still being rated “mostly factual”, so again I’m not seeing this as an overwhelming issue.

The reason FAIR doesn’t is because MB/FC downgrades sources if it (arbitrarily based on the US right skewed Overton window) decides a source is left/right bias even if there has never been a failed fact check. For The intercept it was literally 1 reporter and they retracted all bogus statements, I could see that being 2nd rating then.

Again the 3 sources I mentioned we’re literally the first 3 I checked, it’s not a small issue with MB/FC it’s the fact that the methodolgy downgrades the factual rating if the source isn’t as centrist as the (effectively) 1 guy that runs the website wants the source to be. What number of incorrect ratings would make you decide this is a terrible checker? Cause with some time I’m sure I could come up with any reasonable target given.

So the ADL is ranked the same as FAIR. Seems consistent. You’re also overstating the Wikipedia article, Wikipedia only considers them unreliable on the Palestinian Conflict. The ADL is still perfectly fine (with them) for other things.

Didn’t overstate I specifically mentioned twice what it was basing that off of. Also I don’t see how that would be consistent when 1 source has never failed a fact check and the other has been deemed unreliable on both the Palestinian conflict and on anti-sentism. How should both of those be the same rating?

There probably isn’t a fact checker out there that’s going to be perfect and also free but that doesn’t mean we shoehorn a crappy one in here without putting massive disclaimers clearly calling out the biases it has.

Again left/right based on the website creators definition of those words which is going to be biased.

If they omit information then you can fact check that. Automatically downgrading factuality because they’re not considered centrist by the website arbitrary definition that’s based on the USs skewed view of left and right isn’t objective in anyway.

The fact that their methodology downgrades factual rankings if they (arbitrarily) deem a source left/right bias even if they’ve never failed a fact check shows how terrible it is.

They give the ADL which Wikipedia has deemed unreliable their 2nd highest ranking shows even their fact checking isn’t good.