• kescusay@lemmy.world
    111·
    4 months ago

    So here’s something interesting I didn’t know. Apparently the neurologist who visited the White House several times during Biden’s administration also visited the White House when Trump was there, and when Obama was there. According to this article, we now know who the neurologist is, and he’s apparently been a regular there to treat White House staff for more than a decade.

    It wouldn’t surprise me if he did also discuss the recent Parkinson’s research bill with Biden or his staff, but it looks like he’s just regularly on call there.

    • oxjox@lemmy.mlEnglish
      101·
      4 months ago

      The matter that anyone would think otherwise is a bit surprising. Seems to me that a lot of people are believing what they’re reading on social media, or allowing social media to influence their assumptions, before they take a moment to step outside their echo chamber and consider what reality may look like.

      This headline alone is fueled by social media. Of course, Biden is old AF. But if anyone has actually watched him, within context - not in short edited vides to promote an agenda or generate click revenue, it’s apparent the dude is in fantastic shape for his age (better than me at nearly half his age). It’s also apparent if you give a crap about actual policy and our government, that he’s been one of the most successful, though certainly not without flaws, presidents in modern times. I don’t want to defend the guy - I’ve never been a fan - but reality is reality. Frankly, I would not be surprised if he doesn’t make it, alive, to the election. Moreover, if you’re unsure who you want to vote for this coming election, you sincerely are not thinking straight at all. Frustratingly, there is no choice. A mentally and physically deficient Biden is still inarguably better than a fit and acute Trump. I would encourage people to simply reject all election politics until November.

    • oxjox@lemmy.mlEnglish
      34·
      4 months ago

      It attempts to offer both sides of a story. However, it more often offers both extreme or underreported sides of the story using lower-level websites (sometimes local newspapers putting commentary on top of national paper reports). It’s okay for finding stories but I still use reputable news outlets for obtaining facts.

      The majority of the sites it’s showing have the absolute worst popups and ads and autoloading videos with no ability to use an adblocker or even open an article outside it’s built in browser.

      I assume it’s primarily a data harvesting app.

      Most importantly, IT IS NOT A SOURCE and should be banned from Lemmy.

      Here is the source of the OP https://hosted.ap.org/standardspeaker/article/7e2ee1216e35891600737ce20cdc7d2d/white-house-faces-many-questions-about-bidens-health-and

      • Carrolade@lemmy.worldEnglish
        31·
        4 months ago

        It’s an aggregator, it puts all the links to all the sources in one spot to save time searching. Aggregators are fine.

        • oxjox@lemmy.mlEnglish
          12·
          4 months ago

          I could not disagree more with everything you have said.

          It’s an advertising portal disguised as an aggregator. It promotes articles that are the most click / rage baity to maintain your engagement. It is not a source of journalism. Linking to the general headline it “aggregates” is not proving source. It should be banned from this platform. If the quality of the content they aggregated was reasonable, I would have a slightly more forgiving opinion.

          Edit: For instance, while it does include AP as one of the sources, even though it is the actual ONLY source for this report, it’s the eleventh article linked on the page; with the first link going to a right-leaning website based Argentina.

          Edit 2: They also evidently “aggregate” using an algorithm which can be wrong. There are at least two different stories found here about a migrant raping a minor. One is about an Ecuadorian and the other is about a Honduran. The first link from a right-leaning Hungarian language site, doesn’t appear to be about either of these separate instances.

          • Carrolade@lemmy.worldEnglish
            1·
            4 months ago

            I think even poor sources should be included in an automated aggregator like this. It’s not trying to feed us any form of the truth. It’s showing us everything that is out there, from the blatant propaganda to the respectable journalism, and everything in between.

            I do not use ground news to find out the truth. I use it to see what is being said. All of what is being said. I have my own methods for determining factuality, I don’t want a bot to do it for me.

              • Carrolade@lemmy.worldEnglish
                1·
                4 months ago

                Again, I don’t want a bot to determine what is or is not true. I want it to collect everything people are saying and put it all in one spot. Are some people somewhere publishing something on the topic, true or false? Sometimes I want to see it.

                I want to know what everyone’s stance is, everyone’s messaging, even everyone’s lies, all in one convenient spot.

                Look at it as a propaganda monitoring service if you prefer, that happens to include genuine journalism as well, since it cannot tell the difference.

                • oxjox@lemmy.mlEnglish
                  1·
                  4 months ago

                  Wanting a bot to promote verifiably false information is fucked up. Wanting a bot to conflate multiple separate stories into one narrative is fucked up.

                  You and I may be fine with easily observing falsities but it has become readily apparent over the past 20+ years that literal fake news is having a measurable and long term impact on our society and planet. I fully agree that having access to multiple perspectives is fantastic and we should all want that. The issue is that this particular platform goes well beyond that.

                  Most humans are not intelligent enough to understand what they’re reading even when they are told what they’re reading is inaccurate https://lemmy.ml/post/17790884/12168067