That's ridiculous. Telepolis is tin-foil, crackpot conspiracy-mongering. It being anywhere close in quality to reputable news sources is laughable. It's so far off the mark, I wouldn't even know where to put it on the traditional left/right scale. The "incoherent"<->"this is satire, right?" scale is its natural habitat.
That kind of content would be far-right. However Wired and others seem to include sites that questions anything about the current transgender movement as harassing transgender people.
The article does give details that the site is full of scam companies and other such, so it possibly does host QAnon sites and other unsavory sites.
I’ve just lost trust in objectiveness of Wired or even sites like Scientific American that’d I would’ve not considered being political and somewhat technical in previous years. I reckon it’s more fallout of the polarization of American politics. I’ve seen the same with folks on the “right” as well.
This site reads an awful lot like a bunch of left-wing conspiracy nutters. I don't know if it actually is or not, but that's the impression I get after scanning through it a bit. Not exactly a bastion of journalistic neutrality.
An interesting site, and I don't want to reject it out of hand, but I find it humorous that a site run almost entirely by one person, and whose author claims to be a "leading expert" on CRT and thus rejects it, and which hosts articles entirely deriding the "woke" and "CRT" movements, claims to be apolitical and open-minded in nature.
Slightly off topic - I have not heard of this website, what is the general sense in the community about the quality of the content here? It looked interesting but I am always skeptical of trying new places because a lot of times they are just fronts for certain ideologies and tend to spin the content to suit them. And there is only so much time one has to critically evaluate everything and sift through the nonsense, this is the main reason I have stopped following news.
It's all over the place. It has some confirmed liberals, too.
It's the website that grew out of Bari Weiss's Substack, so the general theme is "counter-arguments to things that mainstream media publishes," which is sometimes a fair look at a valid argument and sometimes crackpot nonsense.
I had never really read anything from this site before and just searched it in Google News. Wow, you weren't wrong. And I'm probably THE target audience for that site (unabashedly leftist). It's very trashy.
I like that the mAiNStrEaM SIteS actually provide relevant results instead of placing fringe, absurd conspiracy theories first. Seems in line with Russian destabilisation campaigns though so maybe that on purpose?
And providing rt.com's propaganda as #2 on "Ukraine invasion"? Totally not suspicious.
OP asked for "manages to steer clear of hateful/racist/bigoted patterns of thought" though.
As well, this media outlet linked in the op is owned by The Heritage Foundation a far-right-wing "think tank". The other pieces of media on the site do not seem to be without a certain political bias.
I found the site tad bit suspicious when they proclaim they are the "small indie company" doing the good fight multi national companies won't (got nothing against left wing causes but I do think far left is a problem) .
With a domain like "think-liberty" the right newspeak circlejerking immediately makes itself visible and I don't even need to click the link. Yet I clicked through. The author's argument is flawed by blaming it on "big companies" like Google without realizing the scope or reach of telecom holdings.
It's the first time I've actually seen them included in any list of reputable media.
reply