| ▲ | crims0n 2 hours ago |
| I used to go to Ars daily, loved them... but at some point during the last 5 years or so they decided to lean into politics and that's when they lost me. I understand a technology journal will naturally have some overlap with politics, but they don't even try to hide the agenda anymore. |
|
| ▲ | beepy 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Perhaps it’s because politics have “leaned in” to the topics they cover, like the FCC, NASA, the FDA, and EVs. |
|
| ▲ | input_sh 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Why should they? There's no such thing as "unbiased journalism", I prefer those that are more open about their politics than those that are poorly trying to hide it. |
| |
| ▲ | crims0n an hour ago | parent [-] | | They shouldn't. They are free to do whatever they want, I am not judging them. I just don't enjoy it anymore so I no longer visit the site. |
|
|
| ▲ | lexicality 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I'm curious as to what their agenda is? I don't read it very often but I've not noticed anything overt. Could you give me any examples? I'd love to know more. |
| |
| ▲ | aqrit an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | _Daily_ hit pieces on Elon Musk (or Musk companies), going for something like a decade. These have petered out somewhat since he left DOGE. But they started way back before he should have had that much notoriety. | | |
| ▲ | sidibe an hour ago | parent [-] | | They were rightfully been calling out the grift at Tesla. On the SpaceX front they've been his biggest cheerleader (even dismissing other stories like the sexual harrassment) |
| |
| ▲ | crims0n an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I got tired of reading about Trump and Elon. | | |
| ▲ | beej71 30 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | I'm also trying to understand. The agenda is to publish about Trump and Elon? Is that correct? | | |
| ▲ | crims0n 19 minutes ago | parent [-] | | The agenda is to highlight when Trump and Elon blunder but ignore neutral or positive stories. Go to the front page right now and look at the articles, I see four mentioning Trump that are negatively charged. That isn't to say any one article is untrue, but hard to miss the curated pattern |
| |
| ▲ | aqrit an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | [flagged] |
| |
| ▲ | gdulli 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | "Agenda" has become code for "ideas I don't agree with", used by people who mistakenly believe it (politics) can be compartmentalized from other everyday topics and only trotted out at election time. | | |
| ▲ | crims0n an hour ago | parent [-] | | I disagree. Agendas are real things. Just because they have one, doesn't mean it is inherently bad or even a disagreeable position... but some people just don't like to be "sold to", regardless of the topic. | | |
| ▲ | jfengel 6 minutes ago | parent [-] | | I'm afraid both are true. And they often go hand in hand. Often, someone calling out an agenda is doing so to sell theirs. (See also "ideology", which is often treated as a synonym.) |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | 40 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] |
| [deleted] |
