![]() Thus, what follows is a review of the points he made in our discussions and in the letter, followed by our reaction to them… However, he declined to allow us to publish the letter, which is what we would have preferred. The senior Daily Mail news executive wrote NewsGuard a long, point by point letter summarising the complaints and the views that he expressed in the discussions we had with him. ![]() NewsGuard has made changes to the .uk Nutrition Label shown above, which reflect the discussions we have had with a senior Daily Mail news executive who insisted that we not use his name… Here are a few elements from the full editor’s note (which is currently here, but fair warning, NewsGuard changes these URLs frequently you can download the NewsGuard browser extension to see it in full). NewsGuard’s “nutrition label” for the Daily Mail is now just short of 4,000 words (with the editor’s note starting about 2,500 in). (Presumably the Guardian headline “Don’t trust Daily Mail website, Microsoft browser warns users” motivated some executive to get in touch.) A Daily Mail spokesperson at the time called NewsGuard’s rating “this egregiously erroneous classification.” NewsGuard published its red rating back in August, but it says it didn’t hear from the newspaper until earlier this month, when the service got a spate of publicity around being available in Microsoft’s Edge mobile browser. Here’s how NewsGuard describes its two primary colors: “Our Green-Red ratings signal if a website is trying to get it right or instead has a hidden agenda or knowingly publishes falsehoods or propaganda.”) (Back in 2017, Wikipedia editors voted to declare the Daily Mail an “unreliable source” that should not be used to back factual claims made in Wikipedia entries, though they did say “The Daily Mail is actually reliable for some subjects,” citing entertainment and sports. ![]() In its editor’s note on the updated “nutrition label” for Mail Online, NewsGuard said: “This label now has the benefit of the .uk’s input and our view is that in some important respects their objections are right and we were wrong, which we think demonstrates the value of the transparency and accountability that imbues what we do.” It still regards Mail Online as failing to gather and present information responsibility, handle the difference between news and opinion responsibly and provide the names of content creators with contact information. In its new “green” label for the website, NewsGuard has rowed back on its previous claims about deceptive headlines, publishing false content and the failure to reveal who is in charge along with conflicts of interest. But the 35-member team now says it was wrong about Mail Online, the Daily Mail’s website, the most read news site in the U.K., according to PressGazette: NewsGuard, the Steve Brill/Gordon Crovitz startup, launched under a year ago with a stoplight system as bumpers for what news sites users should trust and how news sites could be more transparent/media-literacy-friendly. Just completely rich, right winged biased media.August 24, 2018Now The Daily Mail’s rating will show as green on a shield when you visit the website with the NewsGuard extension installed - “this website generally maintains basic standards of accuracy and accountability” - just like The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, and Fox News. So much for focusing on the best interest for women. They tear Brittany Higgins down on a daily basis and refuse to allow any comments supporting her on their website. When a young lady has spoken out against someone that is a sexual predator and trying to make her look bad when he is in court for the same allegations from multiple other women is disgusting. The Brittany Higgins coverage is appalling and goes to show how much they ‘really care for women’s rights’. Pushing hate against a group of people that just want to be themselves and don’t effect anybody else under the guise of protecting women’s rights, is wrong. Pushing hate against trans people and not allowing comments published that follow their guidelines. They do not publish comments that go against Daily Mails agenda’s either. False, biased opinion reporting rather than factsĭaily Mail has always supported government agenda’s and has a heap of fake political staffer accounts constantly fighting each other in each political article in the comments section.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |