tree, 7 months ago (edited 7 months ago)

There is no issue with the source other than it not being the new york times or the washington post or the bbc, every source that is not one of those is unreliable state affiliated media propaganda and is scary and bad because it makes me confused because it says things that make me have to think critically and actually engage with what I’m reading instead of just mindlessly guzzling down the western liberal/center consensus of a handful of “papers of record”.

And then you respond with a different source to which the criticism does not apply

I did not do this, I responded to with the source REFERENCED IN THE ARTICLE it’s in the title of the post, you can literally see it. You clearly did not read the article, no less the title of the post.