politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
newsweek is a conspiracy peddling right-wing rag, please stop driving traffic to them
No
Newsweek in particular is vile and horrible, and you are driving traffic to them. That there are other news sites with problems is whataboutism, it doesn't address that this problem.
Here's an easy alternative: https://www.axios.com/local/tampa-bay/2025/03/25/florida-child-labor-bill-migrant-workers
It's odd that despite having been on Lemmy for a year you've never made a single news or politics post. The very best way to make sure posts are from sources you approve of is to make posts from sources you approve of.
I don't tend to post news or politics, I think those posts are rather saturated on Lemmy.
It's pretty ironic my most recent post is a political post, and here's another political news article post I made ... So to say I've "never made a single news or politics post" I think is factually wrong.
Either way, I was hoping to appeal to your conscience here.
I'm not sure I understand your moral argument - you say that there are moral problems with every news source, and if we held moral standards to the sources we used, no posts would be permitted on Lemmy, but ... you know, there are better and worse places to drive traffic, better and worse places to use as a source. It's not all or nothing, you have to know this right?
So, reading between the lines, what I'm hearing from you is that it's not a deal-breaker for you to drive traffic to a website that perpetuates conspiracy theories and seeks to deny people like me healthcare, that these are morally tolerable positions.
I've been thinking about this a lot since reading this article on free speech about how often people will side with "free speech" until it's a topic they don't actually tolerate - e.g. very few "free speech" advocates continued to defend Milo Yiannopoulos after he started to advocate for pedophilia.
Here's the salient point I think the article makes:
In the end, what I'm hearing is you are willing to tolerate a news source that peddles far-right conspiracy theories that aim to strip people of their rights and manipulate people into rejecting science, that these ultimately are tolerable views, ones you are willing to indirectly support by continuing to link to Newsweek and drive traffic there.
Maybe you would not feel the same about linking to a neo-Nazi website directly, or to a Holocaust denial website, or maybe a website that hosts child pornography or advocates for pedophilia - I assume these are views you probably wouldn't tolerate and wouldn't want to be associated with or support even indirectly.
It's OK if my attempt to appeal to your conscience failed - I assumed from the start that we were more likely to be on the same page on this, but I guess I was wrong. Sorry for wasting your time.
I don't know their past, or their politics, but they are right. Newsweek should be avoided when possible.
same argument as people make with FOSS: if you don’t like it, you can submit a change… it’s an absolute shit argument: not everyone has the time, energy, or drive to trawl sources for new content… that doesn’t absolve the people that do of social responsibility