Whenever I see unknown news sites I check bias metrics for them first, like: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/newsguard/
If that doesn’t work out, then I check for things like an about page or similar to find out about the owners, or the authors pages if they exist. A lot of those fake sites don’t have any of that usually, or provide very generic information, like an example text they copied. I think generally it means people need to be more trustful with vetted news sources and be more mindful not to believe every bullshit presented to them on some random ass website. This was always the case on the internet, and is even more true now in the age of disinformation.“Researchers, platforms, advertisers, government agencies, or other institutions interested in accessing the full list of domains or want details about our services for generative AI companies can contact us here”
I thought I was going crazy because I couldn’t find this list of websites. Fat lot of good this article is.
They’re starting clumsy and idiotic, but this is going to be a shitshow of an election cycle coming up here…
so these are practice runs then …
I interpret it more as hastier people doing a sloppier job. More sophisticated people will produce higher quality, but won’t feel as great a need to jump in so rapidly.
My starting assumption is that almost everything I read online is either misrepresented or totally untrue.
If I don’t recognise the source I assume there’s a high chance it’s bullshit. If I recognise the source well, I still assume there’s a chance it could be inaccurate.
we need some type of adblock filter for these sites asap, and no I am not volunteering free labor :)
