News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
https://wwfeu.awsassets.panda.org/downloads/polar_bear_position_cites_cop_15_final.pdf?
There are links all over the article
I've red them. They basically say that polar bears aren't endangered enough to get the highest level of protection (Appendix I, CITES), but at the same time they give a lot of recomendations to stop hurting their poblations.
And we can agree that polar bears should have the highest level of protection. In my opinion WWF should grant them that status, it seems a little bit unethical fron a "green" organization to say that is ok to trade with polar bear furs.
That is one thing. But to say that WWF is benefitting from trading with polar bear furs? Like wtf, it seems like a HUGE misconception argued in bad faith. As I said, where is the proof?
It’s not “WWF is benefitting from..”, it’s “WWF helping facilitate trade in polar bear fur, investigation reveals”. “Investigation” here refers to the article published in guardian. The proof is the lobbying WWF did. They’re complicit in allowing this, sadly. Other NGOs stood strongly against WWF: https://ssn.org/app/uploads/2019/03/Cop16_PolarBear_EN.pdf
I see. Sad times, thanks for the info.