It’s widely disliked.

I realize that mods for individual subs on different servers need to buy-in, that it’s not just a collective vote. The aim of asking here is the hope that we can get a discussion going and do a vibes check on the community at large.

  • Curious Canid@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    4 months ago

    I would be happy to see it replaced by something better, but I don’t want it to disappear. Having any kind of reference for source reliability, even just as a reminder to think about it, helps provide perspective on political posts.

    We live in an era where it has become normal to dump masses of bullshit online in the hope that sheer volume will convince people it’s true. Pointing out the credibility gap between NPR and Fox News is important.

    • Womble@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      Sure, pointing out the difference in credibility between NPR and Fox news is good. But claiming that the Guardian and the Sun are equally credible is worse than doing nothing.

    • stonerboner@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Something can certainly be better than nothing, but the bias of the bias checker definitely skews right. It muddies the water, and serves counter to its stated purpose.