this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2024
195 points (93.7% liked)

Cool Guides

4692 readers
1 users here now

Rules for Posting Guides on Our Community

1. Defining a Guide Guides are comprehensive reference materials, how-tos, or comparison tables. A guide must be well-organized both in content and layout. Information should be easily accessible without unnecessary navigation. Guides can include flowcharts, step-by-step instructions, or visual references that compare different elements side by side.

2. Infographic Guidelines Infographics are permitted if they are educational and informative. They should aim to convey complex information visually and clearly. However, infographics that primarily serve as visual essays without structured guidance will be subject to removal.

3. Grey Area Moderators may use discretion when deciding to remove posts. If in doubt, message us or use downvotes for content you find inappropriate.

4. Source Attribution If you know the original source of a guide, share it in the comments to credit the creators.

5. Diverse Content To keep our community engaging, avoid saturating the feed with similar topics. Excessive posts on a single topic may be moderated to maintain diversity.

6. Verify in Comments Always check the comments for additional insights or corrections. Moderators rely on community expertise for accuracy.

Community Guidelines

By following these rules, we can maintain a diverse and informative community. If you have any questions or concerns, feel free to reach out to the moderators. Thank you for contributing responsibly!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
all 19 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] BearOfaTime@lemm.ee 21 points 4 months ago

Ask a librarian or fact checking site? I don't consider either of them to be "experts" on misinformation, especially supposed "fact checking sites".

And a librarian's mandate is about managing sources, not being an expert in the data itself.

Otherwise good stuff.

[–] xep@fedia.io 15 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Why a librarian, in particular?

[–] user134450 7 points 4 months ago

Librarians are trained to disseminate many different kinds of information and find relevant or related media and publications, because that is literally their job. This skill can be very useful in finding relevant info for checking a news story.

[–] Hikermick@lemmy.world 10 points 4 months ago

Is the article listed in the "Opinion" section? Opinion is not news. Some sections are titled "Analysis" or "Political Analysis" these should be viewed as opinion. Train yourself to recognize an opinion article by reading the headline before you even click on it. Also look to see if there is a dateline at the beginning of the article. This will tell you where the news is being reported from and the source. Some will tuck it at the end where you're less likely to see it (ahem, Fox News). Some will state in the article who is the source. These sites that are 90% political news will often have reporters in Washington DC and nowhere else. Personally I avoid reading articles who's headline is a question or state what "could" happen. Know that we all are prone to bias. In my lifetime we've gone from literally a handful of news sources to a thousand each catering to a group telling them what they want to hear. Don't be afraid to read stuff that goes against your beliefs, it will better prepare you for debating. Last and not least, for Jesus Fucking Christ don't base your opinion on memes!

[–] ChickenZenphyre@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

What are the good fact checking sites?

[–] hOrni@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

But why even try? If the news support my biases, I'm sticking with it.

[–] vxx@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago
[–] Beaver@lemmy.ca 3 points 4 months ago

I’m saving that!

[–] YourPrivatHater@ani.social 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Addition!

If its financed by a less than democratic government or has ties to them the source is invalid.

[–] Vigge93@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago (1 children)

That's covered under "Consider the source."

The source having ties to a non-democratic government does not automatically invalidate the source, but it should make you scrutinize it more sceptically in relation to the other criteria.

[–] YourPrivatHater@ani.social -2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

It does invalidate the source. And its not exactly covered

[–] Vigge93@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago (1 children)
  1. In what way is it not covered, according to you?

  2. If the news story is, e.g., non-political, does not try to influence your opinion on something, and is based on first-party facts that can be independently verified and that are correctly represented, the source does not matter for the factuality of the news story, even if it is from a non-democratic source.

[–] YourPrivatHater@ani.social 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

What is non political? What doesn't want to influence you when it's from a dictatorship government "news source"

Its not covered, there is nothing about the funding of the News, the contact info and mission they say they have isn't saying anything about who funds it, for some "news" its pretty hard to find out who is actually behind them. Especially regarding topics about china or middle east, or climate change where big oil is literally funding a BS campaigns.

You should search explicitly for discrediting information about a source and then decide if thats plausible and important for the article you read.

[–] Vigge93@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Example: https://www.rt.com/pop-culture/600410-germany-gelsenkirchen-renamed-taylor-swift/

Except for the final paragraph, it is very non-political, and easily verifiable to be true.

I want to be clear that I do not condone or support using these types of sources, since it funds non-democratic governments, but simply dismissing all of their stories as "fake news" without any further critical thinking or fact checking is not correct.

[–] YourPrivatHater@ani.social 0 points 4 months ago

Example: https://www.rt.com/pop-culture/600410-germany-gelsenkirchen-renamed-taylor-swift/

Except for the final paragraph, it is very non-political, and easily verifiable to be true.

So it is untrustworthy. Shure the "fact" of this "news" is true, but thats nither newsworthy nor is it up to journalism standards. It should never be used as source.

I want to be clear that I do not condone or support using these types of sources, since it funds non-democratic governments, but simply dismissing all of their stories as "fake news" without any further critical thinking or fact checking is not correct.

I don't call the news itself fake entirely, i say the news outlet is just not usable as source and should be avoided entirely because they will stage shit to influence people.

[–] synae@lemmy.sdf.org -4 points 4 months ago

So a "cool guide" is random text with some icons strewn in?