Vox often blurred the line between news and editorial
Vox’s Explainers provided only one side of an issue, making it seem as if the information provided is all readers need to know, when in reality, right-leaning individuals would likely include other facts or make different points about the topic, amounting to bias by omission
It’s liberal garbage. It was also irrelevant to the conversation.
If you notice I cite cnn often because while it’s left. It normally explores both sides.
I’m not a fan of vox. I find they skew data, they don’t represent stories well. They are overly biased and the writing is awful.
If you like liberal sources. Mother jones use to be excellent. I haven’t checked it out in awhile. While there is a strong bias, the writing was excellent.
Here you go old sport.
https://www.allsides.com/news-source/vox-news-media-bias
Bias by admission. As I said previously the article was irrelevant to the discussion and its liberal garbage.
Biased doesn’t mean inaccurate.
Not The Bee is very accurate as an example on the right.
Vox often blurred the line between news and editorial
Vox’s Explainers provided only one side of an issue, making it seem as if the information provided is all readers need to know, when in reality, right-leaning individuals would likely include other facts or make different points about the topic, amounting to bias by omission
It’s liberal garbage. It was also irrelevant to the conversation.
If you notice I cite cnn often because while it’s left. It normally explores both sides.
I think you mean lying by omission and I could argue every article ever is guilty of that.
If you’d read the article I provided, you’d see I copy and pasted it.
You did.
Sorry for not catching that.
I’m not a fan of vox. I find they skew data, they don’t represent stories well. They are overly biased and the writing is awful.
If you like liberal sources. Mother jones use to be excellent. I haven’t checked it out in awhile. While there is a strong bias, the writing was excellent.