WorldNetDaily - A Free Press for a Free People Let's see what people think of this. They run bogus stories all the time, yet some people still think they are a credible source. Le's see what LL thinks. This is in response to the exchange in this thread....
| |||||||
 |
| View Poll Results: Is WDN credible as a source? | |||
| Yes |     | 1 | 5.00% |
| No |    | 18 | 90.00% |
| Other (explain in thread) |    | 1 | 5.00% |
| Voters: 20. You may not vote on this poll | |||
| Register to Post a Reply |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools |
02-24-2007, 11:02 AM
| #1 | ||||
| Evil Political Genius The Lab Moderator  Humanist Chicago Suburbs 
| Is WND a credible news source? WorldNetDaily - A Free Press for a Free People Let's see what people think of this. They run bogus stories all the time, yet some people still think they are a credible source. Le's see what LL thinks. This is in response to the exchange in this thread. Last edited by Scrum; 02-24-2007 at 11:33 AM.. | ||||
     |
|
02-24-2007, 11:17 AM
| #2 | ||||
| ipsa Scientia Potestas est  Pragmatist North Carolina
| Obviously not. | ||||
| |
|
02-24-2007, 11:32 AM
| #3 | ||||
| Braccae tuae aperiuntur.  Reform Party
| Definitely not. They're overly biased to the degree where it's totally laughable. I think it has a place though. They often report on stories you don't read from the mainstream media and report it from different angles. You have to fact check everything they say though and sift through all the utter crap, but sometimes you can find something legitimate that was never popularized by the mainstream media. I never frequent the site, just clicks from here when someone decides to link to it. I would think if you spent too much time on WND you'd have a very skewed view of politics. | ||||
| |
|
02-24-2007, 12:14 PM
| #4 | ||||
| America Fuck Yea Election Moderator  Republican In Name Only
| I don't think so | ||||
| |
|
02-24-2007, 02:05 PM
| #5 | ||||
| ipsa Scientia Potestas est Pragmatist North Carolina
| I suppose the same could be said about PrisonPlanet, JaJae. | ||||
| |
|
02-24-2007, 04:42 PM
| #6 | ||||
| America Fuck Yea Election Moderator Republican In Name Only
| Originally Posted by motivez all blogs etc 
| ||||
| |
|
02-24-2007, 04:52 PM
| #7 | ||||
| Political Genius  Republican Yorba Linda Ca.
| When you are in a hurry to be first and be different you let down your B.S. filters. If you must keep double checking a so-called news site then you are doing their job for them. A problem is that in the old days all you had was print, radio, and prime time/morning news broadcasts. Lots of time to get it right. Now everybody want everything this instant and the competition is much bigger. So you get stuck with more B.S.
__________________ Sock It To Me!  "Bureaucracy is a Parasite that Preys on Free Thought and Suffocates Free Spirit!" - Douglas Adams | ||||
| |
|
02-24-2007, 05:03 PM
| #8 | ||||
| Banned  Conservative Government is another way to say Better Than You
| About as credible as the NYT or CBS. See Jason Blair or Dan Rather. | ||||
| |
|
02-24-2007, 05:04 PM
| #9 | ||||
| ipsa Scientia Potestas est Pragmatist North Carolina
| They're far less credible than NYT, CBS, Fox, or any major news outlet. | ||||
| |
|
02-24-2007, 05:31 PM
| #10 | ||||
| Braccae tuae aperiuntur. Reform Party
| Originally Posted by ballz2wallz WND is not on the same page as the NYT or CBS. All major media outlets have their biases, but WND is off the charts and is so far off base it really can't be compared to the mainstream media.
| ||||
| |
|
02-24-2007, 09:12 PM
| #11 | ||||
| Junkie  Conservative Party
| lol hell no They are equal to pravada | ||||
| |
|
02-25-2007, 03:34 AM
| #12 | ||||
| Friend to all.  Socialist Maryland
| It is even less credible than all of you. | ||||
| |
|
02-25-2007, 07:26 AM
| #13 | ||||
| Dissapointed American  Realist Michigan
| Is it credibale as a news source? I'd say no way. Funny? Some of it made me laugh.  | ||||
| |
|
02-25-2007, 06:28 PM
| #14 | ||||
| Technocrat  Idealist Adelaide, Australia
| I don't think many sources are really all that credible - few if any news sources publish news without a conclusion, ie: opinion. It is possible for the source to be of use, but one should always double check with a few other sources as well | ||||
| |
|
02-25-2007, 06:59 PM
| #15 | ||||
| Banned Conservative Government is another way to say Better Than You
| Originally Posted by Kytro Exactly.
| ||||
| |
|
03-01-2007, 10:59 PM
| #16 | ||||
| Ron Paul '08  Republican Queens, NY
| Originally Posted by ballz2wallz No, that does not support your contentions at ALL.
WND is a joke news source, you can't cite that drivel and expect to get away clean with it.
__________________ | ||||
| |
|
03-01-2007, 11:26 PM
| #17 | ||||
| Last Starfighter  Independent Northern California
| So if WND displayed an article from, one of the more reputeable news media out there, then does that not discredit that news source at the same time? After all, noncredibility means that all information automatically connected to the source is null and void. | ||||
| |
|
03-02-2007, 12:32 AM
| #18 | ||||
| Evil Political Genius The Lab Moderator Humanist Chicago Suburbs
| Originally Posted by Diamond Cross No, but if something appears on WND but not on a reputable source, it's BS.
| ||||
| |
|
03-02-2007, 01:21 AM
| #19 | ||||
| Technocrat Idealist Adelaide, Australia
| Originally Posted by Scrum No, but what is published may be on interest and spur further research. This should be done regardless of the source.
| ||||
| |
|
03-02-2007, 08:36 AM
| #20 | ||||
| Banned Conservative Government is another way to say Better Than You
| Originally Posted by Nonphixion For a topic of dicussion on a political forum, I most certainly can, just as much as I can cite another blog, or even wikipedia.
For a professional or educational purpose, I wouldn't cite any of these. | ||||
| |
| Register to Post a Reply |
| Bookmarks |
| Tags |
| wnd |
| ||||||
| Thread Tools | |
| |
| vBulletin 3.7.4 -- Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. | Custom Artwork and Theme (TM) 2006, Liberty Lounge |
