Comment by newsclues
3 months ago
While I don’t agree with them all the time, I find this sort of critique to be unfair and often are attempting to silence alternative media and viewpoints which is a disservice to journalism
3 months ago
While I don’t agree with them all the time, I find this sort of critique to be unfair and often are attempting to silence alternative media and viewpoints which is a disservice to journalism
It is an Ad hominem against the source w/o addressing the actual content of the article.
It did address the content of the article: it suggested a more reliable source that is saying the same thing.
Questioning the integrity of a source is not an ad adhominem argument. Saying that a conclusion is false because of the speaker would be an ad hominem.
Attacking anything other than the argument itself is fallacious. The core of tenet described in Ad Hominem is that the argument is being diminished because of who is delivering it, if it is a person, a robot, a magazine or parrot doesn't change that the argument itself is being ignored.
2 replies →
Before you run cover for these guys you should probably know it’s not “muh based anti-American-imperialist” but agitprop in service of Russian and Chinese imperialism.
That isn't my point at all. Most good propaganda is true btw.