More right-wing bias revealed in website favourites.

[punistation]

Y'know, I really liked snopes.com. It was the best urban-myth website around, explaining all the oldies, all the newbies. That is, of course, until I noticed the gratuitous pro-Bush "urban myth" Updates.

* "Did a Grandma REALLY put an anti-war hippy in it's place?

* "Did Colin Powell REALLY say some clever pro-war snappy answer?"

* "Is Bush REALLY running for re-election, and we should send him money?"


The constant, CONSTANT Right-wing, pro-war, Pro-bush updates became absurd. It ruined a great site for me.



...AND NOW, yet another favourite bites the dust: The PROFESSIONAL CARTOONISTS INDEX.

http://cagle.slate.msn.com/main.asp


I thought it was pretty non-partisan; just another mass-media collection of cartoons reflecting the stories of the times. You'd have pro-war, then anti-war, pro-Israel, pro-Palestine, Michael Jackson baby-dangling, etc. Current Affairs, y'know?

But no, it's right-wing bias is revealed... only because I took notice of the random advertising banner up top. They were the usual ads you learn to ignore... until a moment ago, when I saw the becoming-familiar "STOP HILLARY'S BOOK!" banner. I clicked Refresh a few times, checked out the other atypical ads... and what did I eventually see, but an ad for Ann Coulter's TREASON... for FREE! CLICK NOW!


You have no idea how bummed I am now. I really liked this site. I thought the guy posting the CARTOONS! thread in the Meeting Room Forum was getting all his stuff from there, y'know? All the current affairs cartoons from hundreds of media sources for the current affairs of the day. Now I discover the underlying right-wing pro-bush agenda behind it all.

That bums me out.


Kisses XXOOXX
Jen

[muchacho]

1. Advertising policy

I don't know wbaout Snopes (I do like it though, I've sent many an email forwarder for starving orphans there) but the Slate cartoon page might have the same policy as The Nation magazine.

They take full page ads for FOX news and in the same issue derail and criticize them.

[papau]

2. snopes.com seems to have cleaned out the garbage mentioned

looks ok to these old eyes.

[trotsky]

3. Sad about Snopes

I noticed that too, awhile back. They are very defensive of Bush, discrediting any little rumor that comes along quite forcefully. But in dismissing rumors about Clinton they ALWAYS have a little jab at him somehow.

For instance, in an article debunking right-wing crap about Clinton being the first felon to pardon a felon etc.:

Although what he did may not have been against the law, Clinton's broken promises and contradictory statements about his efforts to avoid the draft were prime examples of the kind of self-serving doublespeak that later earned him the sobriquet "Slick Willie."

It just serves no purpose other than revealing their rightward bias.

[muchacho]

4. Newsmax ad

The "Stop Hillary" ad goes to Newsmax.com to hock some Hillary playing cards.

Man, the Right wing idiots sure love their picture playing cards.

I guess it makes it easier to play go fish.

[DUreader]

5. I wrote off snopes late 2001/early 2002 for their 9/11 cover-up complicity

[charlie]

6. I wouldn't worry about it

Slate gets its ads from the MSN server. Apparently Microsoft, like many others, leases ad space to all comers.

Occasionally, DU would pop an ad for some rightwing outfit. You wouldn't leave us over that, would you?

[newyawker99]

7. Hi punistation!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast: