Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: EPA: Expect More Radiation in Rainwater [View all]SidDithers
(44,333 posts)9. 5 Easy Ways to Spot a B.S. News Story on the Internet
http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-easy-ways-to-spot-b.s.-news-story-internet/
The OP would have you believe that the author of the blog is writer for Forbes:
When, in fact, they're nothing more than a "contributor", which you or I could also be if we wanted to be.
Sid
Oh, and do you still recognize Forbes as the highbrow magazine for investor types? Because guess what: Their website now hosts hundreds of unedited blogs from random, often unpaid writers off the street (http://www.poynter.org/latest-news/top-stories/173743/what-the-forbes-model-of-contributed-content-means-for-journalism/ ).
Seriously, you can write for them if you want (http://blogs.forbes.com/help/how-do-i-become-a-contributor/ ). So now any time you see a Forbes.com story and the URL has "sites/(some dude's name here)" in the middle, you're not reading a news story from professional Forbes reporters/editors, you're reading a blog post from some random person.
That's why you can see a "Forbes" article claiming that a majority of scientists doubt global warming (http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2013/02/13/peer-reviewed-survey-finds-majority-of-scientists-skeptical-of-global-warming-crisis/ ) -- in reality, it's a press release written by a shill for the Heartland Institute, an oil-industry-funded group that ran billboards comparing environmentalists to serial killers (http://articles.latimes.com/2012/may/09/local/la-me-gs-unabomber-billboard-continues-to-hurt-heartland-institute-20120509 ).
Remember, there's a lot of money to be made from bullshit -- that traffic pays the same as any, and they're getting very good at tricking us into doing their promotional work for them. And that goes double if ...
Seriously, you can write for them if you want (http://blogs.forbes.com/help/how-do-i-become-a-contributor/ ). So now any time you see a Forbes.com story and the URL has "sites/(some dude's name here)" in the middle, you're not reading a news story from professional Forbes reporters/editors, you're reading a blog post from some random person.
That's why you can see a "Forbes" article claiming that a majority of scientists doubt global warming (http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2013/02/13/peer-reviewed-survey-finds-majority-of-scientists-skeptical-of-global-warming-crisis/ ) -- in reality, it's a press release written by a shill for the Heartland Institute, an oil-industry-funded group that ran billboards comparing environmentalists to serial killers (http://articles.latimes.com/2012/may/09/local/la-me-gs-unabomber-billboard-continues-to-hurt-heartland-institute-20120509 ).
Remember, there's a lot of money to be made from bullshit -- that traffic pays the same as any, and they're getting very good at tricking us into doing their promotional work for them. And that goes double if ...
The OP would have you believe that the author of the blog is writer for Forbes:
Jeff McMahon
Forbes March 28, 2011
Forbes March 28, 2011
When, in fact, they're nothing more than a "contributor", which you or I could also be if we wanted to be.
Sid
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
36 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
i was wondering why excess radiation from japan would just be showing up *now*.
HiPointDem
Mar 2013
#25
More old news: Audit Confirms EPA Radiation Monitors Broken During Fukushima Crisis
Octafish
Mar 2013
#7
Many people mistakenly believe since Fukushima is not on the tee vee, the 'problem' is solved.
Octafish
Mar 2013
#18
Just wondering why you tried to misrepresent the contributor's blog as a Forbes article...nt
SidDithers
Mar 2013
#13
It's rhetorical. Do you ever post anything that adds to what we know about the BFEE, zappaman?
Octafish
Mar 2013
#26
Like, really. Compared to three meltdowns and exposed spent fuel pools, I did a bad.
Octafish
Mar 2013
#31