this post was submitted on 03 Aug 2024
106 points (70.7% liked)

youshouldknow

141 readers
35 users here now

founded 2 years ago
 

Recently Lemmy.World admins have heavily started pushing an MBFC bot in their bigger subs despite it being deeply unpopular with the users.

However rating propaganda was not enough for the mods as they are now actively fundraising for MBFC as well.

Evidence MBFC is ran by a Zionist:

The bias towards any pro-israel lobby website on MBFC is astoundingly obvious. Take for example UNWatch. UNwatch is still pushing the UNRWA is Hamas propaganda despite it being fully debunked by every country.

Surely a website like this spreading blatant propagands would have a poor MBFC. rating. Let's check it out!

MBFC knows that UNWatch is an israeli lobby but just doesn't think that's very important for their credibility rating

For sites criticizing israel it works the other way around.

They do not have to fail any fact checks, just being designated as a 'hate group' by an israeli lobby is enough for MBFC to become a questionable source.

This is known to the lemmy.world admins and mods

Over the course of the last 9 months I have pointed out multiple times in public and private messages that MBFC is an incredibly bad source of ratings. Multiple other users have also made summaries for the .World mods and admins over the last week (and before that).

The admins have willingly ignored this criticism and now added a donation link to the MBFC bot knowing full well what MBFC stands for. Lemmy.World is directly endorsing the Zionist media lobby.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

News, I can't speak to, I'm not a mod there. The note in the modlog simply reads "antisemitism".

World News it was because you repeatedly backed a group that uses child soldiers after being informed and told to stop.

Here's your modlog for bans:

https://lemmy.world/modlog?page=4&actionType=ModBanFromCommunity&userId=3867209

First page can be pretty much ignored, looks like it was undoing a wider ban than was intended.

The MBFC push is because we are entering a contentious election and the number of posts from specious sources is increasing.

Rather than have the mods fact/bias check each article manually, the bot was enacted as a timesaver.

The number of people complaining about it is a vast minority.

However, I did talk to Rookie about it. The #1 problem is many lemmy apps don't correctly proc the spoiler tag so the bot post ends up being WAAAAY bigger than anyone intended it to be.

So, first, I worked with another mod to determine how bad tag support is on the lemmy apps... it's actually pretty bad.

https://lemmy.world/post/18159539

Second, I hit up Rookie to let him know the problem, he's taking steps to tighten up the bot.

[–] pop@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

The number of people complaining about it is a vast minority.

Probably because, most users/people never check the roots of the site itself. But as admins of a discussion website, you probably should?

Basing your trust upon something because it's aptly named "media bias fact check" makes you look like a gullible fool who tries to link "vaccinesfactcheck.org" to defend anti-vac idiots.

Domains are around $10, damn it. It doesn't make you have superior facts.

Having a check/truth/facts/reliable words on a domain name doesn't make it reliable or trustworthy.

Honestly, it makes you seem like people who'd download a sketchy malicious "Paypal Money Generator" from realpaypalmoneygenerator.org back in the days.

Do better.

[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

MBFC is reliable, from a bias standpoint and a reliability standpoint.

The people complaining are the ones who are not having their own biases validated.

But I'll offer you the same option I offer them... Name another site that's better with a publicly available API for automation. I'm open to the idea that there's something better.

AllSides is great, but they only get into bias, and not credibility, which is a huge problem. It is possible to be highly biased and highly credible at the same time. Ex. Mother Jones. Nobody would say they aren't biased, they also produce excellent, high quality journalism.

AdFontes is great, but doesn't have a publicly available API.

[–] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world -4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So is my worldnews ban getting removed or should I assume you and the other mods support it?

[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

I generally don't reverse another mod unless they TOTALLY go off the rails, and in my short time as mod, I've only seen that twice.

In this case, personally, I don't think I'd have perma-banned you. Temp ban, certainly. You can try appealing to the mod that banned you and reference this comment.