because we want them to be true. Check your sources, folks!

saw it on fb, and tho i agreed, i didnt share it.

"The Hill" gets cited here quite often.

Not just the source but the person from the source must also be reliable.

Can you post a list of reliable journalists?

I would rather give my opinion and be held accountable than hide behind a cited article.

You are always welcome to state your opinion. If you are posting an alleged quote or something that purports to be a fact, just cite your source, but that "source" shouldn't be a meme or some bit of satire someone made up. "Facts" from social media sources like Facebook should be double-checked. If you can't find it anywhere else, don't post it, or at least identify it as satire or humor.

I don't do social media.

I get my news from a handful of sources. Cable morning news is mostly slanted toward right wing talking points. For morning news I do freespecchtv.org and people here have criticized that.

I do Nicolle Wallace, some Chris Hayes, and Rachel Maddow.

I look over what is posted here today (not this thread) and there are a lot of threads that are truthful but they carry water for the right wing narrative.

I really do not care what Krasnov says every day.

Congressional Democrats should all be out doing town halls, the people will come, and we will start changing the narrative.
People would rather post about Krasnov's fake medical report than about SignalGate, so SignalGate is dead and forgotten.

Thom Hartmann gets it, he is my #1 source and he gets criticized here.

and Free Speech TV constantly get bashed here on a supposedly liberal site makes me want to puke.

The same people who complain about the lack of a coherent Democratic message in the media are the ones tuning in to corporate media and nothing else. All they'll see is nonstop coverage of the latest stupid thing the Orange Anus said or did, and never hear about the actual Democratic message.

The corporate media is the problem, they just cover what their owners want covered.

Who are you accusing of being a Russian asset, and please show that proof.

Furthermore, answering to shareholders (or advertisers, or 'underwriters') is NOT a good way to produce news.

HAH.

More like a barrel of it...

from IL6, was in my red district Saturday doing a town hall. The Illinois Democratic Chair Association was there moderating and assisting him.

Bernie and AOC should be staying in their own states, doing town halls across the districts in their states, especially in places where the incumbent will not do a town hall. It does not matter what party the incumbent belongs to!

Casten was not grandstanding. He was performing a legitimate service. Does he get publicity here, or anywhere else? Nooooo. Everyone wants to fall all over Bernie and AOC.

p.s.: If you want to check out the actions of other Democratic congressmen who are actually doing the work, look at Lauren Underwood, IL 14.

But I'm mystified as to why you posted this here. It doesn't seem to be related to the topic of the op.

which said that Democrats should be out doing town halls. Some of them are, but they are not getting the publicity they deserve.

I forgot to check the post you were replying tomorrow silly me!

BTW, Sean Casten was my rep until the district lines were redrawn a few years ago, and I voted for him at least twice (or however many times he came up for reelection), and would do it again. He's a good dude. My area got tacked onto a different district when they redrew all the lines, and I still have a Dem rep (Jan Schakowsky), but sometimes I still miss Sean.

It's true that Democrats holding townhalls definitely don't get nearly enough news coverage. I suspect part of the problem is that news people tend to regard those things as local events. They still haven't figured out that some seemingly local things have much wider significance in this age of Schlump taking a pickaxe and a chain saw to our democracy.

opinion was, "Link?" Our sometimes "Link, please?"

For example, this reply is obviously my opinion. There's no need for me to provide a link or a citation.

However, if one is going to make a claim of fact, or attribute a statement to another person (Martha Stewart being the example from the OP), then yes, an effort should be made to verify it.

However, a reminder is always good to fact check and not post things that can be debunked by a 30 second search online.

Take a look at Facebook and how people believe outright propaganda without any thought. It’s gross.

We want to see confirmation from other sources of what we already believe. So something pops up on social media, which is a cesspool of stuff that's true or satirical or dubious or just plain made-up, and it's consistent with our own belief about how somebody or something is either wonderful or horrible, and we pounce on it and forward it because we want everybody else to see and confirm it. This is just human nature - so we just have to be careful, recognize that something we think ought to be true might not be, and look for verification elsewhere. We have to think of ourselves as in effect honest, unbiased journalists and not just a bunch of randos on an internet message board - otherwise we're proliferating fake news, too.

that was attributed to Betty White about the female anatomy vs male anatomy

people reposted that for years using her name, assuming it was a legit quote from her

That Abraham Lincoln quote about the Internet???

Then you are saying we should believe everything we read on the 'net...

(I'm assuming the quote is "Not everything you read on the internet is true." - Abraham Lincoln)

The sentiment expressed by a quote and the source it's attributed to are two completely separate issues.

...monkeys with typewriters. Which I have to assume is 1000% true.

Last edited Tue Apr 15, 2025, 01:47 PM - Edit history (1)

I can't remember who it was attributed to. Probably no one in particular.

Attributing it to Lincoln is a hoot, considering typewriters weren't invented in his lifetime.

Lincoln was born in 1809. Who knew?

I was going by what Wikipedia said, which is that the first typewriter to be commercially successful was patented in 1868 (three years after Abe died). I'd say there's a good likelihood he never encountered one, but we'll probably never know for sure.

His handwriting!!!

original source to ensure that the story is posted there and that it says what the news feed reports.

Otherwise I concur.

As you say, the stuff he really says is plenty bad enough. Attributing something to him that he really didn't say just gives the cultists an excuse to squawk "Fake news!" when someone reports on a ridiculous real thing he said.

Everyone should know how to 'Google' by now...
You type in what you think they said and they'll return the actual quote sometimes including dates!

might be resistant to typing a sentence or more into Google - you can't just copy and paste from a meme - I wanted to point out that just a snippet of the quote will often work, if it's distinctive enough.

And if you put quote marks around them, since otherwise you'll get search results picking up pages with those words scattered across the page.

I agree 100%! Please cite your sources!

Too often people shoot from the hip without checking the veracity of their gut feelings.

A lies goes around the world before the truth even pus it’s shoes on.

'Pus it's shoes on?'

That's funny.

I would prefer to live in a board world mostly governed by norms rather than rules.

The op was just asking people to be more careful about posting quotes without checking on the source, as a service to our fellow DUers.

I agree, especially when it comes to a graphic without a quote attributed to a famous person. There are a ton of fake ones floating around the internet, and there wouldn't be nearly so many, at DU or anywhere else, if people didn't share them without checking first.

Whether there is an actual rule about it in the DU TOS is completely beside the point.

Currently the policy is for DUers to do their own fact checking, and if they don’t do that, then for other DUers to recognize and point out false information when it is posted. It is not logistically possible for us to have a team of fact checkers or to make fact checking a Jury issue.

You’re correct that there is no written rule against lying on DU, but that doesn’t mean that I approve of people posting fake news. I urge all DUers to double check everything for accuracy before posting, reccing, replying, or sharing, and I don’t disapprove of members posting OPs to remind everyone of this — provided that it’s done in a way which is polite and falls within other DU rules, of course.

“Always check your Internet based quotes before you post them.”

(that might have been Churchill)

The Truth is hard to find

I can spot them instantly because they aren't as beautifully written as anything by Fitzgerald. But they persist.

The problem with correcting people is that I don't want to embarrass people I like who posted it in good faith, and if I don't like the person, then I risk getting caught up in a pointless internet argument. So it's lose lose.

But just for the record, a good chunk of the quotes attributed to Fitzgerald online aren't his, or they are incomplete or wildly out of context.

... a skill we could work on.

We can't complain about the spread of disinformation if we're doing it ourselves...

...the reason behind it is what James Madison and others feared centuries ago, credulous mobs.

The internet has empowered mob incitement, and the flow of disinformation can overwhelm the best efforts at critical thinking.

I'm not sure I can imagine a solution but the problem is a cultural inability to absorb a technology whose consequences we have not been fast enough to understand.

The lie has become in many cases more powerful than truth.

...share techniques. We need to be able to trust DU posts. Thanks for this post.

"Confirmation bias (also confirmatory bias, myside bias[a] or congeniality bias[2]) is the tendency to search for, interpret, favor and recall information in a way that confirms or supports one's prior beliefs or values."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias#:~:text=Confirmation%20bias%20(also%20confirmatory%20bias,one%27s%20prior%20beliefs%20or%20values.

I thought it was a funny joke. JFC...

Did you mean you never believed it was a genuine quote from Martha Stewart, but you thought it was still funny enough to relay to others anyway, and you expected others to also know it was fake? The first replies to your OP showed others here thought it was genuine.

Or did you mean that you believed she'd actually said it, but she'd meant it just to be so over the top it was a joke?

The person most to blame here, of course, is the nitwit on Threads who wrote it and posted it but didn't make it clear that he'd made it up as satire. Very selfish thing for him to do, wasting so much of other people's time that they spent reading/reposting/correcting it - and putting words in Stewart's mouth that will likely keep showing up online and in AI misinformation for years.

It’s not a damn joke when a site that used to be a trustworthy source for fact-based news becomes a slop-bucket for memes. (Editorial cartoons are a special category, by the way. They aren’t memes)

DU provides us all with forums to separate actual truth from jokes & satire:
The DU Lounge
Humor

Not to mention those ever-reliable quote marks, which work in subject lines as well.

I like satire — I don’t like having my leg pulled again and again and again. Tell me up front if it’s Borowitz or just you competing with Borowitz Report. Ha ha.

I like editorial cartoons, too, but they announce themselves, so to speak. They have a place in GD.

What I really do not like is crap in GD that passes itself off as fact, has no verifiable credible source, and turns out to be not just dubious but false.

Thanks for bringing this up, highplainsdem.

"Croyez ceux qui cherchent la vérité. Doutez ceux qui la trouvent."

Believe those who seek the truth. Doubt those who find it.

Living in Europe, I especially get irked when someone posts a tired (and false) meme by one of our untouchable gurus, such as "education and health care are free in [Denmark-France-Germany-Sweden-Take yer pick]." I live in the EU and speak the languages of all the afore-mentioned countries. Doctors do not work for free in those countries. Teachers do not work for free in those countries. The material to build the hospitals and schools were not donated for free. Medicine is not produced from donated materials, or produced in labs built and run strictly by volunteers or leftover Nubian slaves from the Egyptian pyramids. Go find a pharmacy in Denmark without a cashier. There isn't one. These services and materials are financed differently--often MUCH differently from how they are in the USA. But ask the average working Dane about his tax bracket or the VAT rate in his country, and you'll find out pretty quickly how a country like that can offer such services without charging each resident consumer individually. The last time I needed a band-aid in Denmark, I paid for it in Kroner. I was a visitor, and I paid for what I was buying.

As you said in the OP, "No matter how much you agree with the sentiment in a fake quote..." that still doesn't make it true, and no one is wiser if they believe some misleading "information" just because it proves a point, comes from a favorite guru, or because they want it to be true.

"You can't always trust stuff you see on the internet."

helps to never take anything posted seriously until one has looked into the information themselves on multiple sources, not just the ones we agree with. I find a lot of posted stuff to be Q level garbage or highly exaggerated.

I found this quote on the site in my own head. I trust that source!

The ops should be a different thing, unless in the lounge. Quotes with the associated punctuation should get additional scrutiny for sure.

Thanks for the reminder highplainsdem

IMO

Not just quotes.

I never click on them, even if they are done by a supposed reliable pollster. Why? Polls can't be proven one way or the other to be factual.

It has been proven that Magats used bogus polls for propaganda.

When the king of polls, Gallup, put wrong data in its formula, during the Obama - Romney election, that was the final straw for me regarding polls.

I have no problem with people posting polls and just because I won't click on them means very little, just my opinion.