**ALL MEMBERS*** Before Its News as a source

page: 4
81
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 08:37 PM
link   
And whats with the "we have reason to believe that posters may be contributing to BIN for add revenue"
of course i paraphrase but you get my drift.
IF this is the case DO the research FIND the members GIVE a warning! if it persists then BAN the party involved.
put the army of go.... er mods on the case,Give them something worthwhile to do for a change


and why can I not star post's here? is it cos of the sycophantic nature of some of the members and there "click"




posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 08:39 PM
link   
Sorry Springer, but i have to agree to dis agree with many on here now. Your recent admission to being addressed by a supposed possible alphabet agency lately, then this post! Makes me think that ATS, as it has been for a good few years now, a Gov site, gartering information! Sorcha and before it's news......who cares. That is what ATS is about. We the people on ATS decide what is rubbish. Why are you censoring the ATS comunity. We are very capable of censoring our selves, even if the spelling is bad! Sorcha or Before its news...Your getting too much into a nanny state!



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 09:10 PM
link   
'bout time

.



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 09:11 PM
link   
Thing is, the debunking process can be a learning experience. Maybe ATS could warn the members getting BIN ad money, and not ban the site. As boncho said “Anytime the two are listed as the only source, I make a point of tracking down who they originally sourced, and posting relevant info from the actual original. (Usually they vary drastically).”

Seems like lots of people do that and it makes for interesting threads.

Just my .02 worth.



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 09:14 PM
link   
I`ve never thought of BIN as a news site anyway, they link to a news article (from the little I`ve seen of them) and add their own opinion or slant to it, not much different to many threads and opinions here on ATS.

So whoever thought it was an official news source to begin with



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 09:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by stealthyaroura
and why can I not star post's here? is it cos of the sycophantic nature of some of the members and there "click"


BB&Q threads can't be starred. They've never been able to.

And as for the comments about BIN being banned, it's not banned, it's being put in the HOAX bin. You can still use it as a source, just expect to see it in the HOAX forum, unless you have more than BIN as a source. It's not banning it as a source.



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 09:21 PM
link   
Finally. I have never seen a BIN article provide even a modicum of truthful information. I also agree with other members that NaturalNews should be the next to go. I have never seen a truthful, unbiased article come out of them. In fact I have personally debunked a fair number of articles by them myself. They don't care about the truth. They only care about pushing their own agenda. At least with the MSM they will simply twist the truth (to ridiculous degrees) to promote their agenda. NN out and out lies.



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 09:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58

And as for the comments about BIN being banned, it's not banned, it's being put in the HOAX bin. You can still use it as a source, just expect to see it in the HOAX forum, unless you have more than BIN as a source. It's not banning it as a source.


You're right, HOAX, not banned. I have brain fry.



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 10:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Springer
We've come to realization that "Before It's News" has pushed more hoaxes than "Sorcha Faal" ever did, therefor ALL threads started with BIN as the only source will go immediately into the HOAX Bin. For now we won't hold it against the member, but, after a month or so of this policy being in effect repeat offenders will be up for an account review. We've been told there are some "interested parties" (read as people who may be getting a slice of BIN's ad money) who have ATS accounts, that won't fly here.

We don't want to support an operation that continues to push ridiculous hoaxes, just to garner page views with traffic from ATS.

Springer...





I have to say this decision does make sense. While they may occasionally have some good stories (which can usually be found / confirmed elsewhere) they have also published a lot of garbage. I once saw them reprint another websites April Fool's joke as news. I even commented on the article that it was a hoax (though I didn't go so far as to send an email) and it was still there the last I checked. Definitely not the most trustworthy source.


Thank you for addressing this issue-- I know some people, myself included, were wondering why a particular thread had been moved to the "hoax" bin earlier.



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 10:30 PM
link   
Very simple response. Thank you!



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 10:41 PM
link   
Good call !


Haven't visited that crappy site since, well, this crap:

Is Beforeitsnews taking pics from ATS for Bogus Titles?

I would also agree with other members who asked for a list of unreliable sites. New members would most certainly gain from knowing the "shady" sites...

Just my 2 canadian discontinued pennies...
edit on 3-7-2013 by SonoftheSun because: grammar



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 10:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Springer
 


ill try my very best to remember that Springer



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 11:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 


This is not a slippery slope arguement. I am not deferring to any other unrelated examples - as you did in response to my first post. I am staying with the subject - which is - on this site there will be the banning of information presented from certain other websites.

You reference jaywalking and other examples - let's stay with the topic and think critically - not deploy decoys to psychologically draw people away from the thread topic.

People need to have their complete freedom - to think and act on their own cognition. When this site starts telling people from where they can reference information - you are effectively drip feeding the control mechanism.

Having read through the first couple of pages - before I made my first comment - I notices a few people had discerned for themself that Before It's News did not hold any real reference for them - myself included. Matter of fact I only learned of Before It's News when I joined Above Top Secret. I soon discerned for myself that Before It's News was not a site I would visit - I learned for myself.

Seems to me that the website owner has a problem with that site and at the end of the day and at the end of this thread - it is the website owner who will make the call on what to do. I hope this website does not lose a lot of members if there is going to now be a slow and sure list of sites that members are not permitted to reference.

Interesting thread and I am sure at least a few people will be thinking - I wonder whether Above Top Secret is really controlled and owned by the illuminati/cabal/whatever and this is just yet another ploy to control people.

If it looks like a duck and walks like a duck and sounds like a duck - check for a zipper or nano technology. Things that make you go hmmm...

This entire thread could be a barometer to see how many people will agree or disagree. Hmmmm....

Much Peace...



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 11:35 PM
link   
Well,
I find beforeit'sahoax.com to be very entertaining.
It also has that cool ad about candida and a picture from alien with the thing popping out of the guy's stomach.

So, they've got that going for them.

But,

Classing anything from just that site as a hoax does make sense in the area of efficiency.

They kinda have it coming.

As Uncle 9 says, "You plant mango, you get mango."



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 11:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Amanda5
 


The silly thing about putting BIN in the hoax bin, is that you can always go to the source of whatever article was placed on BIN. It is a site that has people take articles from one site and submit them to BIN.



posted on Jul, 4 2013 @ 01:00 AM
link   
Really?!

Everyone who thinks we're "banning the site" go READ my OP (it would have been nice if you did the first time).

Everyone who thinks BIN hasn't been a HOAX Promoter to GAIN PAGE VIEWS (traffic that makes them money) go to bed. No, I mean it, you're not paying attention.

Everyone else, thanks and have a great Thursday (4th of July if you're in the U.S.).

ETA:

Sigh...
Anyone who thinks we will ban a member for linking to a BIN story, you go to bed too.

Anyone who thinks that if there is a credible source in addition to BIN for a story and we will still send it to the HOAX bin needs to READ my OP as well.

Springer.
edit on 7-4-2013 by Springer because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 4 2013 @ 01:16 AM
link   
reply to post by winofiend


But of chouarse, the double standards are glaringly obvious as ATS once more tries to ban the internet.

 


I agreed with you on everything up until here.
If BIN writers are reposting their crap here to garner more views and make more money or simply get more exposure, they are manipulating ATS membership, violating t&c and they are doing so in bad taste.

The requirement not to use BIN as a source is not hard to work around. Every BIN article (for the most part) links the original source same as NN, Infowars, et al.

All one must do is source their source and check the information, or see the subjectivity of the BIN article. Sometimes there are no sources and those ones are really out in la la land. What this does, is it circumvents BINs attempt to abuse ATS for their own profit making agenda. Many of the membership here are very outspoken about profit driven agendas, so I don't see why one wouldn't find it more offensive when it is so direct and blatant.

And while some may view this as censorship, I think of it more like requiring our membership to take a more active role in thread creation. We have to source the source (we should be doing this anyway).

Some may argue the MSM is slanted... quite true in some cases, but many journalists do have some form of integrity, and they must post retractions when proven to be wrong. You yourself can send them mail and inform them of any mistakes they've made (prepare to source your information before you do). And if they aren't interested in hearing it, many competing newspapers are.

I can't remember one instance where someone from BIN admitted to being wrong. Their method of "reporting" is just plain dishonest. There is no oversight.

-B
edit on 4-7-2013 by boncho because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 4 2013 @ 01:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Springer
 


Fine, keep your head in the sand. When im safe in my bunker tomorrow afternoon while you are dealing with the alien invasion and pole shift that happens at 5:00 we will see who is laughing.



posted on Jul, 4 2013 @ 01:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Springer
 


My understanding is that you do not want people referencing/providing links to Before It's News. If people cannot reference that site - or provide links to that site - then effectively you are banning that site.

I will respect your decision - whatever that decision. Before It's News is not a site I visit so should you decide to ban referencing from Before It's News - linking Before It's News - it won't have any impact on me. Have enjoyed participating in this thread.

Much Peace...



posted on Jul, 4 2013 @ 02:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by masonicon
Looks like you'll may trusts nothing but Mainstream news sources as the source due to terrible perception of "Mainstream News are the only reliable sources". Before It's News have some of it's news gone, Natural News is OK but sometimes bit too hippie, and so on


yes and there is another point. They, ie the world's cartel, use the goofy ones to drip some truths out, including Sorcha....mainstream news is the matrix control grid.

censorship is sickening.





new topics
top topics
 
81
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join