- cross-posted to:
- news
- cross-posted to:
- news
After days of water-quality concerns caused by heavy rains last week put the swimming portion of the Olympic triathlons in doubt, the women dove into the Seine River on Wednesday under gray skies that lingered following an early-morning drizzle, followed by the men a few hours later.
The athletes began near the Pont Alexandre III, a bridge that spans the famed Paris waterway. The steady rain tapered off just as the athletes splashed into the water. Some dunked their swim goggles in the Seine before putting them on and heading into the river with the Eiffel Tower in the background.
The decision to go ahead with the swim for the triathlon competitions was a big deal for the city, Olympics organizers and the athletes. Officials undertook an ambitious plan, including 1.4 billion euros ($1.5 billion) in infrastructure improvements, to clean up the long-polluted Seine and have been steadfast in their insistence that the swimming portion of the triathlon and the marathon swimming events next week could safely be held in the river.
Associated Press Media Bias Fact Check Credibility: [High] (Click to view Full Report)
Associated Press is rated with High Creditability by Media Bias Fact Check.
Check the bias and credibility of this article on Ground.News
Thanks to Media Bias Fact Check for their access to the API.
Please consider supporting them by donating.
Footer
Beep boop. This action was performed automatically. If you dont like me then please block me.💔
If you have any questions or comments about me, you can make a post to LW Support lemmy community.
I’m all for a bias fact-check bot post, but I’m not keen on having to scroll two page lengths to get a few bits of info.
Get a different client or open a bug report for your favourite.
Found a different client. Thanks.
How are you having to scroll two page lengths?
I blocked the TLDR bot already for the same reason. I will probably do the same to this.
That footer needs reformatting at least.
So this author has a “high” bias? And what for?
I think you need to reread that. It doesn’t say anything about a “high” bias
It says it in the first sentence?
It says ‘credibility - high’
I can read and that’s not what it says.
I’d love to see you quote what you think you’re reading there.
Just scroll up.
Good for you and good luck with reading comprehension bud 👍
It’s right there. credibility: high not bias: high
Thank you for being the second person to rewrite the comment I replied to. Super helpful.
Posting it one more time to make sure you actually read the sentence.
Such a helpful bunch around here. You even removed the context when you re-quoted the last part!