Hey goys, help Mozilla to make internet safer by reporting m

>>61845768
I don't see anything wrong with this.

>>61845768
Mozilla is for homos

I don't see this as easily abusable .

oy vey, really warms my dreidel

>>61845768
this jew hasn't been involved for more than 10 years

>the Wall Street Jewrnal
>thoroughly fact checked story from a credible news-gathering organization
oy vey

File: GOODGOY.jpg (9KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 480x360px

>>61847502
>>61847733

>>61847773
Also New York Times is pretty much accurate

There really is a coordinated crack down on the internet on all fronts, this shit is getting ridiculous. What is their end goal?

>>61845768
wonder what stallmanchild's opinion would be this (is censorship isn't it)

>>61845768
Goy is singular, goyim is plural. Gentiles can't even into proper English.

>>61847816
read what we tell you to
also
>The first article—designed to inform—receives limited attention.
>The second article—designed for virality—accumulates shares.
money (((they))) are losing

>>61847839
Gas yourself

>>61847839
goy is not english dick cutenstein

>>61847863
Why? I'm a good goy. It's much more likely that you'll be gassed, because superior Jews run the show.

>>61847862
>designed to inform
I forgot that the news media was a charity with the aim of enlightening the public with the truth, not a business seeking to make money and push the viewpoints of its owners, silly me.

File: 1499861475713.jpg (113KB, 631x537px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 631x537px

>>61845768

In United States there will be against the law to criticize Israel soon, so this is just an icing on the cake.

>>61847839

Jews say "goys" in English as well, because Hebrew grammar is not English grammar, you fucking retard.

>Imagine this: Two news articles are shared simultaneously online.

>The first is a deeply reported and thoroughly fact checked story from a credible news-gathering organization. Perhaps Le Monde, the Wall Street Journal, or Süddeutsche Zeitung.

>Wall Street Journal

HAHAHAHAHAAH
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHAHHA
Which one of you trolling retards wrote this article? Nobody sane would call the WSJ credible after all the news articles in relations to cases with documentation available to the public which got twisted and corrupted through the WSJ filter as they wrote an article, glaringly so.

>>61845768
Thank G-d I hope they'll close 4-Chan.

Where's the form to report places that collide with my weltanschauung?

>>61847816
Internet is the new cable, we've reached that critical mass. I'm sure there were plenty of smaller guys squeezed out during the TV era whom no one remembers or cares about, either.

>>61847834
when the censoring is against right-wing people Stallman stays quiet like a jewish rat he is

>>61848123
jidf.com

>>61848031
Le Monde and Süddeutsche are also far-left outlets and looked down upon by many these days. I don't know anything about WSJ, but that's my insight as a European.

>>61845768
Can I report nazis too on this link??

>>61847834
>>61848207
There was no mention of censoring. That's not what this is about.

>>61848221
there is a book released by a french guy exposing le monde as worse than pravda and this french guy worked in le monde for like 11 years

>>61848233
stop lying you jewish rat. The article is clearly saying if the (((fact))) is not found on WSJ or Le Monde website it's fake news
Fuck off

>>61848244
Can you show me a quote where it is saying that? Can show me a quote where they say they want to censor misinformation/fake news?

>>61848221
>anything that doesn't conform to my views is fake news
Typical /pol/ack

>>61848259
>Can you show me a quote where it is saying that?
Jewish rat, the article says that things that are not reported by mainstream media hurts democracy
It's the third and fourth paragraph
lying kike

>>61847816
Gentrify and sell it, turn it into the "normienet", where everything have ads from the big companies.
But this is a mistake in several levels, as they're building their empire out of playing cards and sand.

>>61848324
Are you talking about these:
>The first is a deeply reported and thoroughly fact checked story from a credible news-gathering organization. Perhaps [...].
>The second is a false or misleading story. But the article is designed to mimic content from a credible newsroom, from its headline to its dissemination.
?

>>61848284
I would live to do that to the faggot baby on my plane last night. Kids should be limited to old enough to take a fucking sleeping pill or something

>>61848348
>false or misleading story [as reported by Wall Street Journal and CNN]
>[...]makes the Internet less healthy. As a result, the Internet’s ability to power democratic society suffers greatly.

Conclusions:
- Not verified by large media groups = fake
- Some story that was originally promoted by ''alt-right'' nazis KKK hitler = hurts democracy
- The dissemination of articles not sponsored by big also hurts democracy

I know you are either trolling or is a /v/ contrarian leftist but just in case

>>61848281
Stop projecting, liberal.

>>61848339
People who don't conform to the gentry's stereotypes get stopped and hassled just for passing through """their""" community.

>>61848348
Waht makes you think that's their real intent, rather than a cover for action? Google, for example, is already pushing the World Socialist Web Site down the results for searching for 45 different terms, and is threatening to demonetize sites that simply don't conform to the neoliberal consensus. Nothing Soros touches is ever any good for anyone who's not for sale.

>>61848284
Nigger, there is no leftist bias. You're a Soros shill or a Republican shill, both of whom are barely good for meat.

>>61848221
Respectable news outlets can have political leanings. For example, these two will likely report more extensively on issues that the left deems important, and publish mostly left-leaning opinion pieces. This does however not mean that any of it is false.

>>61848031
>Le Monde
>deeply reported and thoroughly fact checked story from a credible news-gathering organization

>In contrast to other world newspapers such as The New York Times (sic), Le Monde was traditionally focused on offering analysis and opinion, as opposed to being a newspaper of record. Hence, it was considered less important for the paper to offer maximum coverage of the news than to offer thoughtful interpretation of current events.
oy fucking vey

Daily reminder Pizzagate first major article on the big news was written by New York Times 1 MONTH! (28 days) after everything was already disseminating on the internet

The article simple said that ''rumors'' were hurting business and didn't say a single word about the very weird pics of babies and gay jokes

>>61848400
Yes. but you see, the more the old clueless about tech takes over the internet, the less they will care about something called security, specially if they make their infrastructure with the cheapest indians they can hire.

And someday, some russian kid, just for the lulz will take everything down as soon he discovers he can DROP TABLES everything on a name input box.

>>61848411
>Offering analysis and opinion somehow means it's fake

Is this what you're trying to say?

File: The day g died.jpg (83KB, 1186x479px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 1186x479px

>>61848432
Mozilla is using their 300+ million dollars in events while hiring pajeets for cheap or free
That's why we see Firefox getting worse and worse each year even though they finally fixed(after 3 years) the ram leak

>>61848440
Analysis, yes, opinion, no.

NYT: "Pizzagate is a conspiracy"
Article: 0 words about the pics, not even mentioning the content of the pics and not even asking the author why he posted
Conclusion: it's fake news because it's published by a big media news and they wouldn't lie xD

>>61848457
It will be fun to see the pajeteed firefox going to a defcon.

>>61848400
>there is no leftist bias
>you're a Soros shill
lmao, top irony

>>61848402
>Respectable news outlets can have political leanings
Of course. They lean toward what the """respectable""" bourgeoisie wants to have the little people believe.
Class is thicker than opinion.

>>61848411
How times do change.

>>61848440
It means it is no longer an unbiased record, therefore not a valid input for people who have judgment and care to use it.
Therefore, the rich talking down to the poor.
Therefore, soft class war.
Therefore, worthy of retaliation.

>>61848402
It does mean that it is biased though

>>61848488
>thinks social justice is a left-wing doctrine
>not just the logic of the muh market applied to social groups
>such as anyone can buy their way into any group
>and that the market is open to anyone with currency
Fuck off, CTR.

>>61848494
>still wasting time answering to leftist redditors

>>61848440
Opinions aren't facts.

>>61848384
Your literacy skills are pretty bad my dude. This is just an example. Comparing a legit news article (aiming to make it as legit as it might get, hence the examples of big, established news outlets) with an article with misinformation, written to be spread virally. And no, not misinformation as reported by others, actual misinformation (it says right in the beginning that this is an imaginary example).
The site says that the latter receives more attention and has a bigger impact. And that is indeed happening and a problem.

There is no mention that news articles need to be verified by large media groups. Or of any political direction. These are just your interpretations because you want to misunderstand it.

>>61848506
>that the market is open to anyone with currency
Actually the money is only invested in leftist groups
Tell me 1 traditional Catholic or Protestant group receiving money from rich people
It doesn't exist because rich people can't donate to those groups without retaliation

>>61848514
This is just your opinion.

>>61848402
When my football team's coach only reports the goals that their team scored then declares a victory, it doesn't mean that the goals they scored weren't real.

File: hqdefault.jpg (30KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 480x360px

>>61848517
>Your literacy skills are pretty bad my dude
>he still denies that the article is saying word by word that things that are not reported by big media is fake news
Lying kike

>>61848506
>social justice isn't left-wing doctrine
wow, and you call others shills

>>61848517
>with an article with misinformation, written to be spread virally
So I assume the browser will henceforward be warning us of links to articles by the Guardian, Telegraph, New York Times, etc., or at least those with titles along the lines of "Dear Men, You Aren't Heroic Just For Loving Someone Curvy" or "Sexism Row Reignites After Google Employee's Anti-Diversity Screed Leaked"; one being bitchy, bottom-of-the-barrel Vox-style opinion clickbait, the other being misinformation clickbait.

>>61848499
Every publication is biased because nobody wants to read only what happens, but also opinion and analysis. Some are so particular in their choice of what they report that it borders on being fake, like Huffpost or Breitbart. Some are more slightly partisan, like NYT or WSJ.

File: dindu nuffin.webm (188KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

188KB, 480x480px

oy vey mozilla is innocent they dindu nuffin they are just trying to partner with Soros to make a better internet

>>61848544
>he still denies that the article is saying word by word that things that are not reported by big media is fake news
Except, it isn't saying that. At all. And I explained that to you already.

>>61848574
Breitbart amplifies and is pro-Israel but they don't make up stories like Huffpost and Jew York Times
back to /v/ leftist scum

>>61848574
>nobody wants to read only what happens
this is wrong

Everyone in this thread is fucking retarded.

>>61848588
When did NYT make up a story?

>>61848572
It's not about clickbait, it's about misinformation. Which often uses clickbait. But fighting one does not imply fighting the other.

Much like how every square is a rectangle, but not every rectangle is a square.

>>61847502
Is it misinformation to say the Muslims George Soros pays to ship to Europe have created a fun pass time called Taharrush which is basically gang raping European women?

>>61848611
I'm leaving the thread
anyone that reply to you isn't me

>>61848607
What makes you think I care about your opinion about me? I can tell you, you're wrong, but you wouldn't believe me anyway, because it doesn't fit into your world view.

>>61848402
nah man while it's true that respectable newspapers can have polical leanings (they all have political leanings ultimately) Le Monde tend to cite and sometimes misrepresent studies without linking them and in their international reports they frequently lean heavily towards one side, which gives the impression that there's a large consensus on an issue when there is not.
They're far from being the worst and they do good stuff sometimes but they're still pretty sketchy

So many butthurt Trumpanzees escaping their cage.
Shoo shoo
Back to your home
>>>/pol/

File: lugenpresse22.jpg (965KB, 800x1310px) Image search: [Google]

965KB, 800x1310px

>>61848623
>misinformation
Then they need to do something about the aforementioned.

>>61848611
This is the part where, since it's difficult to remember and list any false passage in particular, you will conclude the NYT hasn't published anything demonstrably false. Your best bet is to look at its reporting of the Syrian civil war, because journalists seem to think that if they won't dare to enter a country at war to collect information, then they can just report as fact any old shite fed to them by a small handful of activists and terrorist groups.

File: misinformation.png (12KB, 615x257px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 615x257px

>>61848626
I don't know. If it's true it is not. If it isn't then it is.

File: ngos.webm (3MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1280x720px

>>61848705
Looks real to me.

File: lugenpresse12.jpg (56KB, 720x960px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 720x960px

Let's post some reliable companies that uphold the highest journalistic standards and only publish The Facts, and none of that opinion lark.

File: misinfo.png (93KB, 842x971px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 842x971px

>>61848700
>Then they need to do something about the aforementioned.
It is what they are planning to do. Which you would know, had you actually read the article.

File: lugenpresse12.png (179KB, 649x664px) Image search: [Google]

179KB, 649x664px

Numbers are an alt-right fantasy.

File: lugenpresse10.jpg (284KB, 2048x1152px) Image search: [Google]

284KB, 2048x1152px

>>61848737
You idiot, everyone knows the mainstream press print only reliable information.

File: 212.png (663KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

663KB, 640x640px

>Firefox is bad, better use Jewgle Chrome!
This shitty meme has been going on for years, when will it end?

>>61848742
but that headline is accurate. the study did find that 40% reported a drop.

File: charitable_chief.jpg (105KB, 649x607px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 649x607px

>>61848776
Nobody advertised Chrome, you colossal faggot.

File: lugenpresse18.jpg (170KB, 1353x734px) Image search: [Google]

170KB, 1353x734px

I wonder whether copy-pasting things from other outlets & Twitter counts as trying it spread misinformation?

>>61848742
So.. the headline was right?

>>61848714
this webm triggered me so fucking hard.
fuck this cuck continent and cuck union I'm in

>>61848733
>posts an article and an opinion piece
Are you just pretending to be retarded?

>>61845768

Da fuq are they thinking.

>Hey, Google is driving away a portion of customers...Let's also drive them away from our alternative

BUT WHY

>>61848788
That's always the implied alternative
What am I supposed to use, fucking Midori?

>>61848782
>>61848791
The headline had an obvious bias in what it selectively relays, not to mention a false attribution to some "Trump Effect". They took data and ignored most of it so they could construct a headline with a false narrative. Besides, the number in the headline is 1 too high. Quite disgraceful really.

>>61847816

I don't think it's censorship honestly - Much of this seems like variations of what Rupert Murdoch was demanding from the Australian government - They basically want to protect their monopoly on news services, less for devious conspiracy reasons, and more because...money.

Murdoch fucking rages at people "stealing" his content by repeating information learned from his outlets.

This basically like the news media's version of the MPAA blocking pirate bay and friends.

>>61848831
>sperging over 1% rounding
Drumpfkins lol

File: lugenpresse26.png (296KB, 960x738px) Image search: [Google]

296KB, 960x738px

>>61848806
They shouldn't be publishing opinion anyway.

>>61848031

For instance, this;

The Wall Street Journal isn't left wing. It's another Murdoch rag that pushes pro-big business agendas, and pro-Murdoch agendas.

They want to maintain their monopoly. Why the fuck Mozilla would get in on this garbage is beyond me, unless they view this as their big chance to sell out.

>>61848842
>This basically like the news media's version of the MPAA blocking pirate bay and friends.
Censorship, then.

ITT: Firefox shills damage control this hard
why are firefox fags so attached to mozilla? are they the new apple fags?

>>61848186

They've been trying to make the internet just another variation of Cable/Radio forever now.

I have mixed feelings on net neutrality because of this. On one hand it might slow this process down, on the other - FCC.

>>61848862

Yeah, I mean, but not necessarily to guide a political agenda - Just to basically make the internet another media monopoly like cable or radio.

File: lugenpresse cnn bbc sky.webm (3MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1280x720px

>>61848859
Vice is another Murdoch outlet. He plays all sides, Xanatos gambit.

>>61848705
It is true but come to western Europe and you'll barely here it mentioned and be called a racist and shunned for drawing attention to it. My point is how can we trust that those feel they can designate things as 'fake news' are themselves trustworthy and will be impartial?

>>61848890
But necessarily it guides a political agenda because all news publishers are biased. If you're only allowed access to a subset of them, then bias is being enforced.

>>61848852
>They shouldn't be publishing opinion anyway
It's your own fault that you don't know the difference. It's especially ironic considering how you are complaining about Mozilla suppressing voices.

And btw. that's two opinion pieces you got there with different authors.

>>61848938
I'm well aware. Glad to know you're satisfied with this filthy editorial bias.

>>61848893
The fuck is going on?

>>61848955
>editorial bias
You are seriously retarded. This might surprise you but papers like NYTimes and Washington Post actually has conservative columnists and op-eds.

>>61848908
Yeah, and the media giant here in Australia is pretty cozy with the current PM, I think. It might have been the last PM

File: lugenpresse13.png (239KB, 440x600px) Image search: [Google]

239KB, 440x600px

>>61848984
WHOA I guess there's no editorial bias now.

>>61849059
It's ok when our side does it.

>>61849059
>difference of opinion is bad
Make up your damn mind.

>>61847502
This

>>61849059
at this point I have to assume you're a false flagger trying to discredit people criticising newspapers. Nobody is this retarded

File: lugenpresse9.png (880KB, 1809x1495px) Image search: [Google]

880KB, 1809x1495px

If I own a news outlet and I public 99 opinion pieces saying "IMPEACH DRUMPF" and then 1 saying "Trump is not so bad", that means I'm unbiased.

Also, editorializing, despite being exactly the same style of inflammatory shit Breitbart does, is completely fine when I do it because I have a Democrat stance.

>>61849079
That's not difference of opinion, that's the WP changing its editorial stance after the situation with Comey changed and he suddenly became a temporary villain for Democrats.

>>61849112
s/public/publish/

File: chemical3.jpg (443KB, 1700x1714px) Image search: [Google]

443KB, 1700x1714px

>>61849102
OK, I promise not to criticize the media in the future.

>>61845768
Report cnn

>>61849112
Are you actually retarded? One is the editorial board, the other is an op-ed. The authors of the op-ed are not even on the editorial board.

>>61849112
>changing its editorial stance
notice how one article clearly says "the Post's view" and the other says "Opinions", i.e. "Opinions of guest writers"?

>>61849160
I'm not operating with the assumption that the editors would allow the publication of anything they particularly disagree with.

>>61849179
too bad since your pic clearly shows your assumption is wrong

>>61848968

Non-Fake News (TM) in the making.

>>61845768
>make internet safer by reporting misinformation.
Well this is actually a good idea. I personally believe free speech is over-rated, giving voice to actual harmful people will only spread fake news and confusion

>>61849194
I'm about to fire off an article on Jewish Privilege to the Guardian. It will undoubtedly be published soon.

File: The president just made a titanic foreign policy shift. The media missed it. The Washington Post.jpg (107KB, 679x626px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 679x626px

>>61849179
Sorry to burst your bubble, kid.

>The only major ''real'' open source browser is giving soros power to censorship
Just fuck my jewish up

>>61848900
>My point is how can we trust that those feel they can designate things as 'fake news' are themselves trustworthy and will be impartial?
Mozilla is pretty vague about some of what it is going to do. It didn't mention any (group of) persons being the ultimate judge and classifying articles as fake-news. Then again, it didn't say what those technologies they are developing are.
One thing they are saying is that they want to increase web literacy. Teach users how to assert credibility. Or how easy it is to create fake articles. There is nothing wrong with this idea at least.

>>61849207
alright, if they don't publish that I'll be forced to admit the Eternal Kike controls all media and the Holohoax is real

>>61849199
Funnily enough, the OP sentence itself can be seen as misinformation. As it is neither what the linked article says, nor is about. There is no call for users to report anything.

Mozilla is getting more fucking pathetic by the minute, isn't it

>>61849394
>this is coming from a tripfag

>>61845768
What is it with pretentious old men trying to rule the world?

>>61849227
Yes but it's open to abuse. It's very difficult for human beings to be completely unbiased and objective no matter how altruistic they present themselves. I just disagree with policing the internet in general and would rather people be left to make up their own minds.

File: 1502428742527[1].png (2MB, 1080x1825px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1080x1825px

But fake news are BASED

>>61844287

>>61847839
>goy,goyim
>English

You're one stupid kike aren't you?

>>61848626
Why do you care about women? Or are you just salty nobody pays you to do the same?

It's amazing leftards still defend the MSM after O'Keefe caught them multiple times on camera admiting they lie to the public.

http://projectveritas.com/2017/06/27/american-pravda-cnn-part-1-russia-narrative-is-all-about-ratings/

>>61850288
PRAISE KEK

>>61850288
Wrong thread.

>>61850347
Wrong board.

File: z31.jpg (56KB, 639x479px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 639x479px

>>61848968
They're literally faking a demonstration to make muslims seem peaceful and tolerant. Not that they need to really, after all terrorist attacks are part and parcel of big city life, and muslims can't be terrorists anyway.

pic unrelated

>>61848822
Yes.

>>61850356
>Wrong thread
Maybe you should read the thread before posting, you dumb nigger.

>>61848221
> not breitbart
> must be far left

>>61848574
>but also opinion and analysis
Analysis doesn't conform to the subjectivity of opinion unless the scientific method and objectivity are thrown out, in which case it ceases being analysis and becomes opinion.
I don't know why you put analysis next to opinion, but you are retarded for doing so.

>>61850460
>Muslims
>peaceful and tolerant
>religion based around a mad prophet MuhamMad who waged 64 military campaigns, perpetrated war crimes, fucked children, enslaved blacks, and basically created Islam on the foundations of war
>religion of peace and tolerance
Fucking kek.

>>61850528
Maybe you should.

I want /pol/ to stay in their containment board

>>61850655

I did, all of it, now fuck off back to your safe space. You're so mad O'Keefe has the MSM on camera, admitting they're fake news, you don't even know what bullshit to spew anymore. Thanks for bumping the thread thou.

>>61850987
This is one thing I never understood
>Your opinion is different than mine? Fuck off back to your safe space
>And let me keep mine
Do you endorse "safe spaces"? Where only like-minded people are sharing their opinions?

>>61850612
>MuhamMad who waged 64 military campaigns,
A muslim wouldn't do that, he isn't a muslim and you know it you racist prick.