It pops up all the time, it’s a waste of time and I’m sure it has been used countless of times to discard some piece of information. It doesn’t add up anything productive to the comments, people who comment don’t even say anything they actually think they just “did you know that MBFC says this so it has to be truth?” I could go on but I think you get the idea.
Oh wow. You believe trustworthy means you shouldn’t read something uncritically? What an interesting world you live in
Trustworthy by whose standards?
From Marx’s The German Ideology: “The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas … The class which has the means of material production at its disposal, has control at the same time over the means of mental production, so that thereby, generally speaking, the ideas of those who lack the means of mental production are subject to it.”
You can’t just say “You believe trustworthy means you shouldn’t read something uncritically” when we are LITERALLY talking about what the nature of TRUST and FACT even is, and where people and institutions get their AUTHORITY from.
This is what I mean! You can’t even imagine a situation where a “media bias” site Isn’t BIASED and doesn’t skew their results based on that bias, resulting in the “additional information” CONTRIBUTING TO BIAS.
They all have bias and yet ARE THE ARBITER’S OF BIAS. Do you understand the contradiction now? They do nothing to help a person to be critical because they launder their authority, which is given to them by the uncritical masses, to distribute their bourgeois bias under the guise of neutrality!
Yes i believe the majority of people that assume something is declared trustworthy read it uncritically. If you read my other comment it’s easier to assume everything is not trustworthy, so it forces you to read it critically. What an naive world you live in to not see this