return2ozma@lemmy.world to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish · 4 days agoMAGA Puts Wikipedia in Its Crosshairsgizmodo.comexternal-linkmessage-square160fedilinkarrow-up1782arrow-down17
arrow-up1775arrow-down1external-linkMAGA Puts Wikipedia in Its Crosshairsgizmodo.comreturn2ozma@lemmy.world to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish · 4 days agomessage-square160fedilink
minus-squareundrwater@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up11arrow-down1·3 days agoIt’s always been a jumping-off point, not a primary source. It’s still fantastic that way.
minus-squareFreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.aulinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2arrow-down11·3 days agoUnfortunately that’s not how it’s used. It’s used as a primary source most of the time even on here.
minus-squareAppoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.comlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up7arrow-down1·edit-23 days agoThat’s the issue of the user.
minus-squareundrwater@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down1·3 days agoSure, but many will cite a news organization’s opinion page as fact. Is this a good reason for any administration to target opinion pages? The administration is supposed to represent the Constitution, not attack it. Remember your constitution; particularly the 1st amendment.
It’s always been a jumping-off point, not a primary source. It’s still fantastic that way.
Unfortunately that’s not how it’s used. It’s used as a primary source most of the time even on here.
That’s the issue of the user.
Sure, but many will cite a news organization’s opinion page as fact. Is this a good reason for any administration to target opinion pages?
The administration is supposed to represent the Constitution, not attack it.
Remember your constitution; particularly the 1st amendment.