I didn’t say they mischaracterize the site, I said they made an “effort to categorize The Daily Wire as ‘misinformation’”. They wrote a slanted article demonizing The Daily Wire and similar sites with input from only those with one view of the matter who push a specific agenda. It’s clear to me that this is a part of the widespread effort to deplatform “misinformation” initiated by the far left, taken up by the Democrats, and now being championed by the White House.
Yes, and I said I don’t think they go that far.
I addressed your argument. I’m not interested in semantics unless it will promote understanding.
Then you shouldn’t engage in it. Why would you tell me what you didn’t say when I clearly told you what I didn’t agree with?
I did my best to respond to your argument. I thought that you might have misread or misunderstood mine so I prefaced my response with a clarification of my position.
Alright. Well, it doesn’t seem that way to me, for the reasons I stated. I certainly don’t like the article though.
Why do you think the author wrote the article and the NPR published it? To me it was a very thinly veiled attempt to put pressure on Facebook to increase efforts to get social media giants to take actions to reduce the influence and reach of the right wing sites mentioned.
That seems like a stretch. If that were true, the article would look a lot different. I think they just believe what they wrote and someone thought it was worth publishing
That is a very strange, and unlikely, take.
I don’t think so, it can be seen all the time The article barely mentions misinformation, so it does seem unlikely that it was intended to demonstrate that, even if it was possible they might do that.