undefined | Better HN

0 pointsundersuit8y ago0 comments

So WSWS is a known dishonest and/or inaccurate website?

0 comments

WSWS? Oh yeah. It's an extreme left site that makes no attempt at any objectivity.

I hate to have to ask again. Lack of objectivity isn't dishonest or inaccurate.

ob·jec·tive (of a person or their judgment) not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts.

So is WSWS a dishonest and/or inaccurate website?

macspoofing8y ago

If you notice, they seemed to be flagged for neutral historical search queries. Things like "Russian Revolution". Someone reading it would get a viewpoint that is not supported by mainstream historians. So yes, dishonest.

undersuitOP8y ago

Do you have any proof that the content they host is dishonest? I'm seriously asking.

EDIT This page doesn't seem dishonest: http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2017/08/07/twrr-a07.html Are you saying Google has examined the historical accuracy of this page and found it lacking?

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

macspoofing8y ago

WSWS? Oh yeah. It's an extreme left site that makes no attempt at any objectivity.

undersuitOP8y ago

I hate to have to ask again. Lack of objectivity isn't dishonest or inaccurate.

ob·jec·tive (of a person or their judgment) not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts.

So is WSWS a dishonest and/or inaccurate website?

macspoofing8y ago

undersuitOP8y ago

Do you have any proof that the content they host is dishonest? I'm seriously asking.

EDIT This page doesn't seem dishonest: http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2017/08/07/twrr-a07.html Are you saying Google has examined the historical accuracy of this page and found it lacking?

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse