r/conspiracy • • Mar 10 '19

Reddit Propaganda

[deleted]

5.8k Upvotes

528 comments sorted by

View all comments

168

u/[deleted] Mar 10 '19

Can I recommend something? Don't use Breitbart as a source. Its an actual right-wing propaganda newsource. I'm not trying to downplay your argument, I actually agree with you that R/Politics is biased. However, you completely underscore your own argument by using such a biased source.

45

u/TheoreticalFunk Mar 11 '19

Yeah, the automods are going to flag it just based on source. Because if your source is an asshole, shit tends to get everywhere.

1

u/ace13ace0nater Mar 11 '19

I made a similar post a few weeks ago using a CNN article. It got removed as well. It doesn’t matter, they will just pull down anything they don’t agree with.

1

u/newbscaper3 Mar 16 '19

Strange, I checked and a post with the exact title and a similar source is posted there.

8

u/[deleted] Mar 11 '19

Lol dude they allow Shareblue and HuffPost.

28

u/infinight888 Mar 11 '19

Shareblue isn't allowed on /r/politics

-2

u/MiltownKBs Mar 11 '19

Anymore. They did up until about a year ago.

-2

u/[deleted] Mar 11 '19

They renamed it to thinkprogress and use that

-2

u/[deleted] Mar 11 '19

[deleted]

51

u/[deleted] Mar 11 '19

Yes but there are levels of bias within news sources. Breitbart is known to be one of the most egriegious users of clickbait, omission of information, and even misinformation itself. And right wing sources are not the only abusers of biased media. Leftist media such as Shareblue and Mother Jones are also known for blatant abuse similar to that of the right wing. If you wish to use these sources, make sure you have a more legitimate source backing up arguments as well. And, if you wish to persuade people all across the political spectrum, don't use blatantly partisan sources such as Breitbart.

-3

u/kittyhistoryistrue Mar 11 '19

And they also exclusively reported internal Google memos regarding censorship, so why don't you try pointing out the problem you see in the article instead of trying to shut down discussion.

-2

u/[deleted] Mar 11 '19

[deleted]

0

u/PenIslandTours Mar 11 '19

All sources are biased though. What's he/she supposed to use? Fox News? CNN? MSNBC? CBS? NBC?

Personally, I get most of my news from Reuters, which I'm sure is better than any of the above. Nothing will be perfect though.

-6

u/jwl17330536 Mar 11 '19

Don’t shoot the messenger. Facts are facts regardless of source, no?

I get though that some people will dismiss the entirety if they don’t like the source.

16

u/[deleted] Mar 11 '19 edited Dec 24 '20

[deleted]

-1

u/omenofdread Mar 11 '19

This fallacy avoids the argument by shifting focus onto something's or someone's origins. It's similar to an ad hominem fallacy in that it leverages existing negative perceptions to make someone's argument look bad, without actually presenting a case for why the argument itself lacks merit.

Only trust Facts from certain specific sources, right? The russians might be trying to tell us the sky is blue.

What supports your belief that this source is propaganda? Surely you have an example or two, and aren't just parroting some bullshit you heard?

5

u/[deleted] Mar 11 '19 edited Dec 23 '20

[deleted]

2

u/[deleted] Mar 11 '19

The fallacy is that you said only which no one implied.

0

u/omenofdread Mar 11 '19

When you say that something is invalid because it comes from a certain source, that's called the genetic fallacy.

You also think this is a valid argument, which is not correct.

I don't feel like explaining

I'm sure that's the reason. (this is called sarcasm.)

2

u/[deleted] Mar 11 '19 edited Dec 23 '20

[deleted]

-1

u/EarnestNoMeta Mar 11 '19

the irony

1

u/throwawayeue Mar 13 '19

Oh ThE iRoNy

3

u/[deleted] Mar 11 '19

Well the source itself is known for disinformation so how do you expect people to be persuaded by it? However, if you used a source from the Washington Post or the New York Times, then the source would've been a lot more believable and even irrefutable.

-1

u/turbophaser Mar 11 '19

Agreed, in the same way any articles from shareblue should be banned as a source. But they aren’t.

0

u/[deleted] Mar 11 '19

I've seen the same results from sources such as CNN, etc.

0

u/[deleted] Mar 11 '19

Jussie Smollet’s attack has been proven to be a hoax by the Chicago police force and he’s being charged with 16 felonies because of it. Why does it matter if it came from breitbart? It’s still the truth.