Hacker News Reader

Comment by mike_d | Hacker News Reader

Zero Hedge does not provide factual information.

"...we rate Zero Hedge an extreme right biased conspiracy website based on the promotion of false/misleading/debunked information that routinely denigrates the left." https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/zero-hedge/

View on HN

I agree about Zero Hedge up to a point, just from personal experience and seeing the kinds of articles it puts out .. but who is mediabiasfactcheck.com and why should I trust the unpaid interns* that work there to tell me what I should and shouldn't believe in, and who is and isn't credible?

EDIT:

From https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/about/

"Dave Van Zandt is the primary editor for sources. He is assisted by a collective of volunteers who assist in research for many sources listed on these pages."

All these fact checking organizations rely on young, inexperienced unpaid/low-paid interns to interpret complex situations and provide a final 'truth' score that is then used as some sort of authority. Insanity.

I mean it's not like their reasoning is secret.... you're obviously free to respond to the substance of their analysis if you disagree.

OP stated that Zero Hedge has not been found credible by some fact checking organization. I'm asking what makes them credible to make those judgment calls. It's not incumbent on me to assume their competence and/or objectivity and expand effort to prove otherwise.

Even if zero hedge has an extreme right bias, does that mean everything they report is fake news? Was seth rich really shot twice in the back and not robbed despite the official story saying he's a robbery victim? He certainly had access to the DNC emails and was a devote bernie sanders supporter. It's a low barrier to connect those dots and it becomes even more suspicious when left wing media and "fact checking" websites jump to calling it a conspiracy theory. It seems a lot more likely than the russian story which is falling apart every day with official memos saying hillary pushed the russian narrative to distract from her email server. I'd love to believe we live in a fair and just society, but maybe we dont.

Still tripping at how clueless you're pretending to be. Grow the fuck up and take responsibility for your view of the world.

It's also true that you can respond to the substance of ZeroHedge's analysis in the article in question rather than deferring to a third party who made an assessment of ZeroHedge's general trustworthiness.

Media Bias Fact Check rates the Washington Post as "Factual Reporting: HIGH" even though they accepted $4.6 million from the Chinese Communist Party to run the China Watch section of their website with articles provided word for word by the CCP.[2]

The articles look exactly like real news articles except for the text "A paid supplement to the Wasington Post" in the upper right corner.[2] Had I not known better I would've assumed this meant I'd get a paywall if I viewed too many articles.

This seems every bit as egregarious as anything you'd find on ZeroHedge. I have a very low level of trust for almost all media, but I check Zero Hedge to at least see interesting items ignored by the mainstream.

1. https://efile.fara.gov/docs/3457-Amendment-20200601-2.pdf

2. https://web.archive.org/web/20170715051533/http://chinawatch...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com