Why do people automatically dismiss conservative news outlets like Breitbart...

Why do people automatically dismiss conservative news outlets like Breitbart? Have they ever been proven to be misrepresenting the news stories that they write about? I see the major networks issue more retractions than the smaller ones.

Other urls found in this thread:

breitbart.com/national-security/2016/09/07/7-sep-16-world-view-2013-history-syrias-bashar-al-assad-created-isis/
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

They report news people like to pretend doesnt exist.

No but they suck Israel's cock so they should be ignored

I feel like you’re right. Every time I try to have a conversation with someone and I reference a story from Breitbart they just immediately dismiss it for not being a “real” news site.

>Breitbart is anti globalist but pro Jewish and pro Zionist
Literally how?

kikebart

this

Is there an outlet that is anti globalist but not zionist

I dismiss them because they are zionist neocon garbage

>How Syrias Bashar Al Assad created the Islamic State
breitbart.com/national-security/2016/09/07/7-sep-16-world-view-2013-history-syrias-bashar-al-assad-created-isis/

But is there anything factually wrong the news they report?

Because as much as Left-Wing news outlets are largely filled with marxist faggots, Right-Wing news outlets happen to be largely filled with neocon, pro-Israel faggots.

This.

Breitbart is a blog that spins conservative rage bait fromeed from the AP.

It's drudgereport only with a comments section.

My issue with Breitbart is I had to ublock the hell out of it just to get rid of the ads and social datamiing share links.

This is what a current version of breitbart after my ublock origin filtered it.

retard conspiracy theroy morons. there's a ton of them here and they'll never go away.

learn to sift out their opinions. Breitbart is pretty good especially their coverage of immigrant rape robbery crime and economic impact. I encourage all boomers, who need a more simple format, to read that website.

just ignore the retards and carry on with the site as usual

But is there anything factually wrong about the news they report? It doesn’t seem fair that people don’t accept it as a legit news source just bc they don’t agree with the news

This. Have a you.

kikebart is a joke because it is owned by (((solov))) and pushed faggot zionist jew bullshit and faggot euro pedos...

saged

Breitbart is controlled opposition you sweet summer child.

Because Israel is also anti-globalist/pro-nationalist.

You can't use them in conversations with centrist as sources and they are just as sensational at times. Trying to use the same format as failing msm is a proven failing model. Adapt.

Major news networks issue more retractions because they are willing to criticize themselves and admit they made a mistake.

Because it’s not educational and they don’t do original reporting, they report what actual reporters say.

You don’t learn shit about anything from those sites.

>Marxism
>popular
Not unless you're reading the CPUSA's newsletters

Because they have been conditioned to. Their entire lives they have been trained to dismiss "faux news" and anything that leans slightly to the right. To them, far-left news is centrist and reliable and anything on the right is to be dismissed as propaganda.

It's the result of years of conditioning. Please study up on your Uncle Yuri.

*tips tinfoil*

>Have they ever been proven to be misrepresenting the news stories that they write about?

>Breitbart

It is so sad how quickly that rag spiraled, after their namesake was merced. It quickly became the controlled opposition, releasing articles that might as well had been written by any meat-head, back-country hick.

It doesn't matter your sources nowadays. You could throw an AP article in someone's face, and they'll still dismiss it. Just call it how you see it, and save the resources for people who are receptive.

It's literally part of Rules For Radicals.