If EA is going to engage in politics, and remain a “broad tent” that includes people with varied political views, then we will need to face the problem that people with different political views typically consider different sources reliable.
For that article in particular, I see a link to a Polish news report. Jacek Wrona appears to be pretty well credentialed (this was the first result on Google, but I am translating it from Polish to make this judgement). So is your contention that Breitbart lied, and that Jacek Wrona never said this? Or is your contention that Breitbart accurately reported on Jacek Wrona’s statement, but because he is obviously wrong regarding his assessment of the situation Europe faces, his statement is unreasonable as the basis of a report? If the second one, is it ever possible for you to continue considering a source reliable if it publishes a statement by an expert that contradicts your worldview?
I’d also be curious to know what sources you consider credible yourself. When I read Wikipedia’s article related to New Year’s Eve sexual assaults in Germany, I see this statement:
Several media outlets at first ignored the story and only started reporting on the incidents on 5 January, after a wave of anger on social media made covering them unavoidable.[45] This delay was criticised by several politicians, including Hans-Peter Friedrich.[204] The public television channel ZDF later acknowledged that they had failed to report on the incidents despite having sufficient knowledge to do so.[205][206]
These sources are apparently reliable enough for Wikipedia, and they call the credibility of mainstream outlets into question.
If EA is going to engage in politics, and remain a “broad tent” that includes people with varied political views, then we will need to face the problem that people with different political views typically consider different sources reliable.
For that article in particular, I see a link to a Polish news report. Jacek Wrona appears to be pretty well credentialed (this was the first result on Google, but I am translating it from Polish to make this judgement). So is your contention that Breitbart lied, and that Jacek Wrona never said this? Or is your contention that Breitbart accurately reported on Jacek Wrona’s statement, but because he is obviously wrong regarding his assessment of the situation Europe faces, his statement is unreasonable as the basis of a report? If the second one, is it ever possible for you to continue considering a source reliable if it publishes a statement by an expert that contradicts your worldview?
I’d also be curious to know what sources you consider credible yourself. When I read Wikipedia’s article related to New Year’s Eve sexual assaults in Germany, I see this statement:
These sources are apparently reliable enough for Wikipedia, and they call the credibility of mainstream outlets into question.