Source/citation shaming

[Allybeboba]

Is source/citation shaming against the 'rules'?
I often see people link a source for their information when people ask for such and then people hand wave such sources off. They say they are not "credible" sources.
This is partly why I rarely, if ever, link sources to my information. People will just say they "don't believe" the source or simply discredit the source. It is easier just to have the person have them look it up for themselves.

[Grimbold21]

You criticise - and make fun of - someone if they ground their arguments on posts which you know are inherently biased, with the most notorious example being Breibhart, or foxnews.

[Misuteri]

You criticise - and make fun of - someone if they ground their arguments on posts which you know are inherently biased, with the most notorious example being Breibhart, or foxnews.

Or the BBC, CNN, NY Times, Washington Post, ABC, NBC, CBS, AP....

Fake news is fake news.

[Aggrophobic]

Is source/citation shaming against the 'rules'?
I often see people link a source for their information when people ask for such and then people hand wave such sources off. They say they are not "credible" sources.
This is partly why I rarely, if ever, link sources to my information. People will just say they "don't believe" the source or simply discredit the source. It is easier just to have the person have them look it up for themselves.

So you get informations from unreliable sources and you're annoyed when people do not belive this information?
Why? Can't you just use more reliable sources? What is the actual problem here?

[Imnick]

Not all sources are created equal. It's ridiculous to call this "shaming". If you are getting your information from a garbage source, of course people should point it out.

[Aggrophobic]

Or the BBC, CNN, NY Times, Washington Post, ABC, NBC, CBS, AP....

Fake news is fake news.

Funny. You guys make that list longer every time you post it.

[Elba]

I mean, if you link to something that is basically a blog and not an actual news site, yeah, you should be shamed.

[Allybeboba]

My question goes unanswered.

However, I think some might start seeing the gist of my point.

[Deleted]

You do know that you don't have to respond to such people, right?

Also, preferably use several sources that back up each other, that tends to be a good way of preventing such notions.

[Allybeboba]

Not all sources are created equal. It's ridiculous to call this "shaming". If you are getting your information from a garbage source, of course people should point it out.

What exactly is a "garbage source" and what isn't?

[Tyrianth]

Funny. You guys make that list longer every time you post it.

And they include the BBC... one of the most credible and highly respected source of international news...

[Allybeboba]

You criticise - and make fun of - someone if they ground their arguments on posts which you know are inherently biased, with the most notorious example being Breibhart, or foxnews.

We have someone saying Fox is bad.

Or the BBC, CNN, NY Times, Washington Post, ABC, NBC, CBS, AP....

Fake news is fake news.

And we have someone saying all of these are bad.

So, who does that leave?

[Independent voter]

AP and Reuters are good, NY Times and Washington Post are written by left wingers who try really hard to be unbiased.

[Tyrianth]

What exactly is a "garbage source" and what isn't?

A source that doesn't report on facts, but their own interpretation of it. A source that attacks people that go against their own bias. A source that uses strawmen to represent their opponents arguments.

This recently posted article is an example of a shitty source:

http://patriotreporting.com/2017/04/...-than-the-nra/

"Lord save us from brain dead faux intellectuals."

Starts off with an insult.

"Liberals have ranted on forever that the NRA is evil and anyone belonging to it is basically a demon."

Strawmanning opponents point of view against the NRA.


"He contends that ISIS is less evil than the NRA. "

Not what he said, but their own spin/interpretation of it.

[Allybeboba]

AP and Reuters are good, NY Times and Washington Post are written by left wingers who try really hard to be unbiased.

Agree, AP and Rueters are very good indeed. WP isn't too bad on some of their stuff.

[Manabomb]

And they include the BBC... one of the most credible and highly respected source of international news...

That's why this wave of conservative fascists are so dangerous, because they are trying to continuously discredit the free press for getting facts inaccurate or just sometimes wrong as a means to justify their news outlets that don't even bother reporting facts.

It's the new age rise of children not learning from their parents mistakes.

Edit: Also, remember kids, it was conservatives and catholics that brought the rise of the third reich. Hitler was simply their mouth piece.

[purebalance]

You criticise - and make fun of - someone if they ground their arguments on posts which you know are inherently biased, with the most notorious example being Breibhart, or foxnews.

Fox is about as biased as CNN at this point and Breitbart is on par with Huffington Post in terms of bias yet both CNN and Huffington Trash are somehow acceptable.

- - - Updated - - -

AP and Reuters are good, NY Times and Washington Post are written by left wingers who try really hard to be unbiased.

Washington Post is definitely not unbiased and has stopped trying once Trump took office.

[kail]

https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/588/02/

Source credibility is learned in highschool and utilized beyond when forming a thesis or trying to support an argument. Link a source that lacks credibility, expect people to distrust it. It's also funny when people link an opinion piece and expect others to take it as fact.

[purebalance]

Until CNN starts reporting on white deaths by police as much as if not more than(more white people die by cops annually) black deaths, CNN isn't a reputable source in my book. They're providing a false rhetoric in not reporting them.

[Serpha]

You criticise - and make fun of - someone if they ground their arguments on posts which you know are inherently biased, with the most notorious example being Breibhart, or foxnews.

any-post, salon etc...