I started to notice some thing weird while using Reddit, every link post from Condé Nast owned news outlet was getting a high amount of upvotes and awards while other publications had a very normal rate of awards( usually zero, with the exception of the sponsored ones) and upvotes.

That when I started to investigate this matter till I found out about this.

They are boosting their publications on Reddit on the major subreddits. They are trying to give their publications a advantage over all the other news outlets.

They have the ability to kill the other news outlets if they keep doing that. Avoid them as if your freedom is dependent on it.

  • FundMECFS@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    62
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    While I sort of agree. I’m just gonna say, you ain’t gonna find anything mainstream western media that doesn’t have major ties to unethical corpos unless you basically force yourself to only use AP and the Guardian (and even then, pretty sure they still have dodgy ties, just it’s not as visible since no direct “ownership”.)

    • cymbal_king@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      2 days ago

      Propublica is an excellent nonprofit investigative journalism organization. They have a strong track record of holding powerful companies accountable and achieving real world results/consequences. They often partner with local news organizations to help give them good content and there’s never a paywall either.

      • FundMECFS@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        2 days ago

        But that has direct ties to the US government. (And as we’ve seen under Trump), those ties can be abused.

        So I agree they are good services. But IMO they still have dodgy ties.

        • Initiateofthevoid@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          (And as we’ve seen under Trump), those ties can be abused.

          You mean because the holder of the highest position in government is upset about the exercise of free speech by PBS and NPR?

          Those ties that we have seen where the government is trying - and so far failing - to crush those outlets for dissent, and are actively being sued for it? That abuse?

        • Ocean@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 days ago

          What time is the government does npr/pbs have? Please tell me your talking about something other than the grant money they receive

    • considine@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Consider The Guardian’s campaign against Jeremy Corbyn as an anti-Semite. Or their many character assassination pieces against Julian Assange. These campaigns serve the interests of the Zionist lobby and the US empire, respectively.

      If you are critical of modern imperialism and capitalism, then The Guardian and AP do not have good takes on many issues. Currently, The Guardian publishes articles critical of the genocide in Gaza, which is the only correct position to take on the issue. However they have served Zionist interests in the past and carried water for US warmongers.

      While they get on the bandwagon when critical mass gets unstoppable they also manufacture consent for empire.

      • huppakee@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        18 hours ago

        The Guardian publishes articles critical of the genocide in Gaza, which is the only correct position to take on the issue. However they have served Zionist interests in the past and carried water for US warmongers.

        You can be independent and still carry interests of Zionistd and US warmongers, both knowingly and unknowingly. You have every right to be skeptical because of previous publications and also every right to share that here, not trying to argue there, but there is no such things as always having the correct position. Every media outlet will at some point publish something questionable. My point being, you should never swallow news as a definite truth also when you’re trusting a certain source in general.

        • considine@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          14 hours ago

          That’s a good point. I totally agree. Every news source has its biases.

          The scary thing is getting hundreds of millions of people to believe Western news delivers the truth, while non Western news delivers the lies.

          Also I don’t believe there is a single correct position on every issue. But on genocide there is a basic take: stop it immediately.

          • huppakee@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            13 hours ago

            While I sort of agree. I’m just gonna say, you ain’t gonna find anything mainstream western media that doesn’t have major ties to unethical corpos unless you basically force yourself to only use AP and the Guardian (and even then, pretty sure they still have dodgy ties, just it’s not as visible since no direct “ownership”.)

            They are two examples of more believable / trustworthy western news outlets, I don’t think anyone in this thread is anywhere close to implying all western news is true or that all non-western news is false.

            Concerning genocide, almost everybody on earth agrees the only sensible thing is to stop it; that’s why most pro-Israeli news act as if there is no genocide happening there. I think they are wrong, Israel is committing genocide.