• fukhueson@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    25
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Already posted evidence, bad source is bad.

    Edit: this is so tremendously stupid, op is defending the poll while I’m discussing the source. Anyone down voting, feel free to explain to me why we should be giving any attention to Erdogan’s state-run media instead of the guardian.

      • fukhueson@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        24
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        You should be able to find this information presented by a reliable source, like I did.

        https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/brookings-institute/

        Overall, we rate Brooking Institution Left-Center biased based on donations to primarily Democratic candidates and policy advocacy that slightly favors the left. We also rate them Very High for factual reporting due to strong sourcing and a clean fact check record.

        Edit: op thinks I’m refuting the poll and not the source. Stay calibrated, boss.

          • fukhueson@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            22
            ·
            8 months ago

            I’ll click a guardian link, thanks. Is there a reason you chose to post a much worse source for this information? I, along with others here, refuted your source. Why not post the guardian article in the beginning?

            • CaractacusPotts@lemmy.caOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              15
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              8 months ago

              Posted the Guardian link previously. This just reinforced the Guardian story.

              Free to block me if you don’t like the way I post. My feelings won’t be hurt.

              • fukhueson@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                19
                ·
                8 months ago

                I don’t see why presenting another worse source reinforces anything. I might come away with the impression that if a worse source is also saying the same thing that the information might be suspect.

                I would think the guardian article would suffice.

                  • fukhueson@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    arrow-down
                    17
                    ·
                    8 months ago

                    I don’t think that addresses what I said, and you don’t have to read what I post either, but I would hope you’d understand that presenting information from dubious sources is not a good way to get ideas across.