No, I don’t think all sources are unreliable. I think they all come out of echo chambers, they have bias. Truthful things can come out of echo chambers. My point isn’t to dismiss all information, it is that you need to factor in the journalistic echo chamber/bias when analyzing information and come to your own conclusion about its veracity. If you’re a liberal, read articles from CNN but remember the source. If you’re a conservative, read articles from Fox but remember the source. People tend to only factor in the source when the information is NOT reflecting their own morals back to them. They should always factor in the source.
@Useriousclark The problem is those sources you named, while biased, will both at least provide citations, assertions, and facts however they may spin them. The publications this story is in cite nothing and incite everything not to their liking. Complete trash that panders to the mentally lazy, the paranoid and those looking to hear news that tells them exactly what they want to hear—but it isn’t news.
Right. So I’m not a fan of Fox News in the least. Most of their “opinion” content is outright trash. However it does at least have some level of claim to be a legitimate news organization.
It’s a different story with the ultimate source of the article posted here. It’s just pure unadulterated bullshit designed to get ignorant people riled up.
Well yeah, I used those as examples that we all know but they are completely biased. Both sides of the aisle have their less reputable trash sources too. I’m merely pointing out that when you’re considering the veracity of something, you should factor in that source’s bias. You should factor in other things too - common sense, citations, multiple sources, etc. But one of the things you should always keep in mind is that they all come through their own echo chambers. And citations are only as important as the things being cited. Would this article have passed your smell test if it had cited other nonsense articles?
There is nothing to cite other than the teacher herself who claimed she was fired for that reason. An English teacher claimed he was fired for using the word "homophone" because somebody thought it had something to do with homosexuality.
Ok so there is more than an English teacher’s claim before you print a story. First, where is this school located? Who is the principal? Where is the school? Who is the regular teacher this substitute teacher was teaching for?
People! If you have these basic facts you can research the truth!!!! You can interview multiple people, you can confirm this is an actual teacher and an actual student. You can research the teacher’s disciplinary record because it is a public record and you can confirm whether said teacher was actually fired.
Without these things more reputable news sources are not going to run with this. Has anyone taken a journalism course ever? Or basic English? WHO, WHAT, WHEN, WHERE, WHY AND HOW. Basic stuff this fairy tale lacks. Once you have that you can cite public records. This news source cites a Tik-Tok account. So yes, there is tons more to cite. This is scary that anyone with minimal critical thinking would think this has the ring of truth. This is nothing more than some hateful person with an axe to grind with the LGTBQ community that put down their nursery school edition of Aesop’s Fables, woke up their obese diabetic plagued hamster that runs the wheel in their brain, and thought up some mentally deficient story they have repeated to every cousin they ever dated.
Would this article have passed your smell test if it had cited other nonsense articles?
First articles are not necessarily citation. Second, without any factual confirmation the article is what people call a lame anecdote. You do not even know when this happened (which it didn’t), the teacher’s name is unknown, we do not even know what grade! The article is one big quote from a Tik-Tok user looking for more followers. Sorry but if you believe the story @HogboblinZwei needs your help to return to his country!
My cat identifies as a duck.
@Mike403 - What is that old, yet only sometimes reliable, saying?
If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck…then it is probably this cat?
Might have gotten that wrong…
Minor off topic interjection here, but... All of this is a huge factor in why I left this site a while back. For whatever reason there came a point where the fun parts of debate and discussion had dropped off and everything started to feel a bit too reasonable predictable and tidy. So what a nice treat to pop back in and read through this thread! It has nearly everything I'd been missing!! Okay, that's all. Please carry on...
"My cat identifies as a duck" is another of those claims that confuses gender with a physical characteristic.
Or, in another words, a standard attack against trans people.
@quixotic_life: You are such fun.
Yeah... This is just blatant transphobia. You mightve got away with a thin veneer of plausible deniability if this werent already an incredibly overused trope.
You people know here are such bullies all he did was post a link to a minor little thing and y’all go attacking him like he was some sort of monster. Give me a break.
@supadupa: ...A minor little lie in the same vein as all the others used to make sure as few people as possible ever understand the difference between sex and gender. A single, tiny little drop in the ocean of disrespect and hatred for trans people. Hardly anything at all, really. Not worth saying anything about.
Edit: It's not the person I'm attacking. I used to say things like this, too—I didn't know gender was a psychological and social thing. I thought it was as externally visible as the difference between a cat and a duck.
All you had to do to tell the difference between a man, a woman, and a miserable freak (I thought) was look. I was wrong on... many different counts.
It's the lie I'm objecting to.
@supadupa When someone posts something blatantly made up and is a poorly disguised attack on a group of people and call it news then you point it out. But if you want to pat people on the head and say how cute, then no one is preventing you from supporting hate speech.
Hate speech perpetuated in the media and then taken as gospel by its readers are the bullies of the intended target. This article had multiple targets—trans people, bad writing, and intelligence. I can tolerate the bad writing, but the other two I can not support. If no one will say something when someone posts something that is derisive of a segment of the Cuddle Comfort community, then that creates an unwelcoming environment for them. I pointed out, as did many, that the story is obviously hateful and unsubstantiated by any basic evidence. That is not bullying.
@supadupa ”You people are such bullies, all he did was spread lies designed to cause others to feel prejudice and resentment against a certain group.”
Nobody bullied anyone in this thread.
Came to the thread late and have little to add. I am concerned about the dwindling number of relatively objective sources of information. And I was wondering if anyone could recommend sources that still have a solid reputation for journalistic integrity.
I have been keeping my head down more than I care to admit in terms of staying informed. And getting back into that feels daunting in the same way that getting back in shape feels daunting.
🙈🙉🙊
Another round of social awkwardness strikes again..... I never once had trans people in mind when making that post. It is starting to become too difficult for me to speak on this site without the risk of offending someone.
@Mike403
Whoever fabricated that story clearly had denigrating trans people in mind. It's a blatantly obvious attempt to rile up conservatives who are worried that their way of life is under attack from anyone who isn't a cisgender heterosexual conservative.
And you fell for it.
@MonkeyNeedsAHug - These are three good sources to start with:
1) Associated Press (founded in 1846)
2) Reuters (founded in October 1851)
3) Wall Street Journal (founded on July 8, 1889)
Moral of these examples is that anything that had been communicating news for over 100 years is fairly trustworthy.
*Also, this is a good resource to use to gain a broad idea of which direction different news sources and websites lean politically:
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/
@MonkeyNeedsAHug: Another good tip is to check sources cited. Look for articles that cite primary sources: people, agencies, etc., who were directly involved in whatever the story's about. Bonus points if you can check the primary sources yourself (for instance, links to a cited research paper or video of a quoted interview).
@Mike403: Why did you believe it was even possible that a teacher would have been fired for not treating a student like a cat?
It wouldn't be because people have lost their jobs for misgendering others... would it?
Meh ~ Social or otherwise we all make mistakes. A lesson hopefully learned by way of some here providing great advice for credible info sleuthing (snopes.com used to be a good one too btw).
Anyway, not sure about others, but when I'm tired, have allowed myself to veer down an unchecked rabbit hole and come across something that makes me say aloud, "WTH? No way!!" I just want to share how insane it is. Lucky for me though I have a dog and cat as a gate keepers (who look at me with eyes that say, "don't") so I don't tend to post such things I've fallen for. But dang, if I'm at work and happen to mention it, I'll get laughed at and school for being so clueless... kind of like what happened here.
No biggie really ~ I just try looking at as another form of an adulting tax... It's just another price to pay to be one.
@quixotic_life - I flagged my own post yesterday and asked for this thread to be deleted....yet here it stays.
@Mike403 Like @quixotic_life said, we all make mistakes. I am sure they will delete your post soon, but the site is paper thin on mods right now. I think @Babichev is the only one currently and she doesn’t spend every waking hour pouring over posts doing something she volunteered for.
Omg!! I never really read the polls but God am I happy I checked this one out😅
@johnnyfontaine Im officially stealing the word “didn’test” from you😅
@HogboblinZwei That was just one of the best responses to a comment I’ve ever scene😂 I’m screaming laughing over here. Thank you for a good start to my day👌🏾
Sometimes when we move out of our intimate circle, our instinct is to defend ourselves (“that’s not what I meant!”) rather than to apologize. People know that no one is perfect; what they don’t like is when we pretend to be.
@PeopleLikeUs - The whole thing was about somebody getting fired because she didn't want to play along and meow at a student. Whether it was fake news or not, there was nothing sexist or racist about it. You all decided to turn it into a transphobe attack.
We didn't turn this into a transphobic attack. That's what the article is @Mike403
Yes, we all decided to turn the fake article into a transphobic attack. It wasn't because of the language the article used, who the article was meant to appeal to—those who do make light of transphobia and thus enable it because of their loathsome mindsets—no, we got into communication via walkie talkie after consulting with the Secret Trans Council of Victimization, received clearance from the Grand Arbiter of Trans Affairs, and began to attack you specifically, and whoever wrote the article. Which, as established, is totally based on fact.
That is exactly what happened.
Agreed, @PeopleLikeUs.
The article might as well be titled "People Being Allowed To 'Identify' However They Please Is Costing Sane People Their Jobs."
It's very blatant.