this post was submitted on 21 Feb 2025
192 points (99.5% liked)

politics

20345 readers
2964 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. 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 another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. 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.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple 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.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 13 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] littlewonder@lemmy.world 30 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (2 children)

Just a reminder that 404 media is owned and run by its own journalists.

I'm tired of news that's been filtered through a billionaire's best interests.

404media.co

[–] Nursery2787@lemmy.ml 6 points 4 hours ago

Propublica is an independent non profit. And they partner with other journalist non profits in a variety of states.

[–] Cat@ponder.cat -2 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Just a reminder, 404 Media is still operating for profit.

[–] LandedGentry@lemmy.zip 23 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

I’m fine with that if it’s collectively owned by the people who are doing the actual work.

[–] Cat@ponder.cat -5 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

I understand, but that does not change the fact that they will always be looking to maximize their profit.

[–] BertramDitore@lemm.ee 11 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

To add some context, one nice thing about the independent model 404 Media has gone with is that they tell us exactly what their motivations are, in their own voices (it’s only four people). On their podcast they’ve been very open about what they want, and maximizing profit is not it. They’ve talked honestly about what it costs to operate, and they’ve said the infinite growth model is not what they want to emulate. They just want to keep doing good journalism, they are not in it to get rich. Since I believe and trust their journalism, I’ll choose to believe them on the business side too, and that’s up to everyone to decide.

I think they’re in touch with their readership enough to know that they’d lose a ton of subscribers if they sold out or started making terrible profit-driven decisions.

But who knows, I don’t know them personally so they could just be really really good liars.

[–] Cat@ponder.cat 1 points 53 minutes ago* (last edited 51 minutes ago)

They literally have ads and paywalls. Both.

You can check the website, but they even written a garbage article about how the internet had lewd thoughts about the female avatar of the christian church.

I don't know what they need to do more to show you that they are looking to maximize their profits.

People don't understand that better capitalism is still capitalism.

[–] LandedGentry@lemmy.zip 8 points 9 hours ago

You have a very myopic view of how people make money

[–] reddig33@lemmy.world 40 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

NYT and Washington post are just garbage now. It’s sad.

[–] Jaderick@lemmy.world 31 points 13 hours ago

I’m pretty sure they always have been. IIRC you’ll find op-Ed’s praising Hitler and Germany leading up to WW2.

They also deliberately slandered the guy that broke the (CIA admitting cocaine from Nicaragua into the US to fund right wing militias) story that often gets told as “the CIA introduced crack into black communities”. They effectively discredited the story, which turned out to be true.

The Behind the Bastards episode on it is p good

[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 23 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

Always has been

🌍 👩‍🚀 🔫 👩‍🚀

Who remembers NYT sitting on the illegal NSA wiretapping story for the Bush admin for over a year?

Pepperidge Farm Remembers.

It wasn't until more than a year later that the paper's executive editor, Bill Keller, rejecting a personal appeal and warning by President Bush, gave the story a green light. (Bush had warned "there'll be blood on your hands" if another attack were to occur.)

[–] BertramDitore@lemm.ee 33 points 13 hours ago

These stealth edits are unacceptable. They are tantamount to the NYTimes shouting about their cowardice from the rooftops. Do they really think people won’t notice? Clearly they underestimate how satisfying it is to catch them in a lie, which is ironic for a newspaper whose reputation has been bolstered by exposing (some) lies.

I thought correction notices were standard practice. It’s not like they can correct the hard copy, so fuck all their online readers I guess? Infuriating, but we shouldn’t expect anything better from them at this point in their downfall.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 1 points 13 hours ago