re: Is tigerdroppings the best place for nonbiased news?

quote:

---

THE SITE is not biased

---

You and Breesus are both making this same argument, but it's not the "gotcha" you think it is. This unfortunately reflects a really annoying trend here, which is instead of engaging with the topic switching to a kind of related thing and arguing against that instead, then calling it a win. This thread is not asking if tigerdroppings has rules and policies in place that allow unbiased discussion. It's asking if it's the best place for nonbiased news. What's the point of hypotheticals like "well it would be unbiased if more liberals posted here, because they're totally allowed to!"? We're talking about reality.

It doesn't matter if liberal posters are allowed to post whatever they want. Yeah, that's absolutely true. But if the vast majority of users are right-leaning, then the majority of content will be skewed right-leaning. The users make the content, and the content makes the site. The users are biased, the site is biased. I don't mean the administration is policing or pruning the content. I mean if you come to this board it is not going to be a "nonbiased source of news". I agree that r/politics is way more actively manipulated. It's more similar to thedonald.win in that respect. BUT it's also got massive left-leaning bias in what is submitted and upvoted in the first place. It is also the product of its users.

You could have a totally unmoderated tree stump that anyone is allowed to pin whatever news article they want to it, but if it's placed outside the front entrance to MSNBC where all their employees pass every day, it is not going to be an "unbiased news source".

The responses to my posts are literally proving my point, lol.