TheTechnician27

The 12% were charged for the war crimes not being severe enough.

I could’ve looked at other authors’ work, tried to find an editorial team, etc., but didn’t think it was worthwhile. When you frequently write and cite sources in said writing, this type of investigation often becomes second nature.

If it’s any consolation, I can show you something similar to potentially swap in which actually is written by experts. The Conversation is always written by subject-matter experts (usually professors of the subject) and covers the same breadth of topics. The Conversation is basically what the Daily Galaxy wishes it were, and it’s one of my favorite items on my feed.

That’s fair, and hopefully here I can give you something more concrete than just saying “wow dumb source lol”.

• The article is written by Arezki Amiri. This author puts out two or three articles per day on a very wide variety of topics, yet he lists no qualifications except: “expert specializing in health and technological innovations. He has extensive experience in sharing his knowledge on the impact of space technologies on health and science in general.”
• A ton of words are bolded with no rhyme or reason. Far from being something related to accessibility, this is done so your brain keeps seeing bolded text and subconsciously thinks “something important; better keep reading”.
• The article links to the Daily Galaxy at the words “sewage system” for absolutely no reason except for SEO. In this article about Bezos, it links to “1,300-Year-Old Royal Flush? Ancient Korean Palace Toilet Stuns Archaeologists!”. When legitimate news sources do this, it’s to enhance understanding; for example, a news outlet referencing an event from four years ago might link to one of their articles covering that topic for readers who may not be familiar.
• The words in this article (and other articles of Amiri’s) feel like they were at least assisted by an LLM. A big tell is that LLMs love to say “it’s not X; it’s Y”. They also absolutely adore em-dashes.
  • “This isn’t just about sewage; it’s about how the wealthiest individuals […]”
  • “This move wasn’t about being unreasonable; it was about fairness.”
  • Other articles of theirs reek even worse.
• Not a single one of their articles appears to be original reporting. It’s always a summary of one source.

TL;DR: I’m 99% sure that every article from the “Daily Galaxy” is just taking an existing article (journal, news, etc.), running it through an LLM to summarize it, randomly adding bolds everywhere for atrophied, dopamine-starved zoomer brains, and published two to three times daily per author. It’s a content mill.

• It’s trivial to bypass the paywall.
• The paywall is only there if you’ve already read a certain number of articles.
• It’s still a considerably better read than this telephone game version from the “Daily Galaxy”. (Edit: reading it all the way, it’s almost guaranteed written by an LLM.)

Here’s the NYT article they’re aping instead of checks notes whatever the fuck the “Daily Galaxy” is.

Why is every, like, sixth word bolded? Like I know pragmatically why, but it’s so transparently designed for brainrotted zoomers who think 300 words is “long”. What a slop trough of an article.

This man looks like the evil Karl Jobst.

I don’t know if you remember or saw, but when Rachael Lillis – a voice actress who played Misty from Pokémon among others – died last year, news outlets went wild baselessly saying she was 46 until both the NYT and CBC News actually contacted her family and confirmed she was 55. Unless the outlet did their own fact-checking of the age, I think qualifying with “reportedly” is responsible journalism.

rather than reading an article talking about it

Good as a supplement, but the RPS article gives context itch.io is too much of a cowardly little bitch to include like: “Collective Shout describe themselves as a “grassroots campaigns movement against the objectification of women and the sexualisation of girls”, but are associated with outspokenly homophobic and anti-abortion Christian conservative groups, according to a now-deleted Vice article.”

Edit: and yes, the Vice article was removed because Vice’s ownership bitched out over covering Collective Shout.

How would this branch be structured? How would it interface with the other branches? How would its members be appointed? What does “Infrastructure and Public Welfare” entail? Why are “Infrastructure” and “Public Welfare” grouped together? What powers would it have to carry out its job, and what specifically is that job? Based on those previous answers, how would it solve any existing or foreseeable issues? Why would it be better positioned to solve those issues than a change made within the existing three-branch framework?

Yeah, because you posted this six hours ago when their frontpage headline on this was 15 hours ago: “Israeli fire kills 67 people seeking aid in Gaza, medics say, as hunger worsens”. And the current second-top news story on their website is “Israel sends tanks into Gaza’s Deir al-Blaah, hostage families concerned”. Front page of the AP includes “UK, France and 23 other countries say the war in Gaza ‘must end now’”. Gaza is damn-near always frontpage news.

Did you even follow the link in my comment you replied to where I showed articles published that day from several of the most prominent news organizations on Earth about Palestinians starving?

It seems like @jordanlund@lemmy.world is the only active mod of this comm. Plausible it slipped past them. So in the event 1) the rules are actually enforced with literally any consistency and 2) jordan notices, it ought to be removed quickly. As best I can tell, our OP who was too lazy to just post one of the mountain of news articles lucked out.

It is. The OP just didn’t give enough of a shit to actually post it here.

I don’t know why the opinion of the owner of newsweek and similar yellow press should decide what is posted here and what not.

Alright, instead of falling for a farcical red herring and debating the merits of a Mastodon post as “self published opinion news”, I’ll cut to the heart of the matter: what the fuck are you talking about?

• Palestinians describe choice between starvation and risking death to get food aid in Gaza from PBS News two hours ago
• Updates: 18 in Gaza die from starvation in one day amid Israeli blockade from Al Jazeera today
• Four-year-old girl dies of hunger in Gaza as Israel throttles food supply from CNN today
• Malnutrition reaches new heights in Gaza, children most affected from the Agence France-Presse today
• Pope condemns Gaza war’s ‘barbarity’ as 85 reported killed while waiting for food from The Guardian today
• Officials say 85 Palestinians seeking aid are killed in Gaza as Israel widens evacuation orders from the Associated Press today
• Nearly 100 people killed seeking aid in Gaza on Sunday, Palestinian officials say from NPR today
• Israel fire kills dozens more aid seekers in Gaza, medics say, as hunger worsens from USA Today today
• Israeli Troops Kill Dozens Seeking Food Near Border, Gazan Officials Say from The New York Times today

And that’s just about the starvation and just from today and just that short because I couldn’t be bothered to spend more than five minutes looking. All of these sources are allowed here; none of them are yellow press. Quit your bullshit; nobody’s gatekeeping this, and if they were, it wouldn’t be Newsweek et al.

I would like to see Newsweek blacklisted here too. Would you like to advocate for that, or would you like to sit around and whataboutism for a Mastodon post that you’re trying to dishonestly distort into a “self published opinion news story”?

And even if you’re seriously going to pretend you buy your own “card says moops” bullshit when you say that, what do you have to say to the final bullet point of Rule 1 that disallows links to other social media “like Twitter”?

Dude, I don’t even have the bandwidth to translate this comment into a coherent English paragraph. As best I can tell, it’s just a bizarre strawman about banning(???) instead of removing an off-topic post, and it’s done as a deflection from you “not having the bandwidth” (read: being unable because you know it was nonsense) to justify why you called it “card says moops”.

Are you referring to the actual Seinfield scene or the Alt-Right Playbook video? I can’t figure it out because they’re equally irrelevant.

Dude, the person you’re replying to has lost the fucking plot. What a baffling Lemmy history. It’s like the linked shit take was grown in a lab to be optimally shit: any less and it’s less shit, any more and it’s less plausible someone believes this, making it less shit.

Okay, so it can go in one of the like 500 communities where this is relevant. If it’s bigger than the rules, why did OP, with one exception, choose to do none of that and instead exclusively post it into news communities where it’s not supposed to be? Where it will quickly get removed?

“This is bigger than the rules”, I say like a jackass, as I go post this into a community about artisinal cheeses.

Fuck Israel. They are committing genocide through starvation. That’s why this deserves to go somewhere it’s actually supposed to be, and OP knows where those places are.

OP, literally Rule 1 bullet point 1 of this comm. This is a community for news articles.