Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Media

SleeplessinSoCal

(9,736 posts) Tue Jul 14, 2015, 04:20 AM Jul 2015

what is going on with Huffington Post?

For the past several days the headline has been somethong normally found on Page 6. And there's no breaking news about the Iran deal. Just more of Trump's ugly mug.

4 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

what is going on with Huffington Post? (Original Post) SleeplessinSoCal Jul 2015 OP

seriiously SleeplessinSoCal Jul 2015 #1

I implore someone to confirm that HuffPost is in trouble SleeplessinSoCal Jul 2015 #2

Same story now and then hon3y Sep 2015 #3

It was a bug of some sort - for days it was gibberish. SleeplessinSoCal Sep 2015 #4

SleeplessinSoCal

(9,736 posts)

1. seriiously

Reply to SleeplessinSoCal (Original post)

Tue Jul 14, 2015, 08:35 PM

Jul 2015

The same story about Trump & the FBI is the head story. Then the tumnel.

Something is fishy.

SleeplessinSoCal

(9,736 posts)

2. I implore someone to confirm that HuffPost is in trouble

Reply to SleeplessinSoCal (Original post)

Thu Jul 16, 2015, 02:37 PM

Jul 2015

It seems that the entire editorial staff has been abducted. Nothing about anything important on the newsfeed.

hon3y

(2 posts)

3. Same story now and then

Reply to SleeplessinSoCal (Original post)

Thu Sep 10, 2015, 07:33 AM

Sep 2015

Yes, I am feeling the very same and old story of Trump from other news sources too.

SleeplessinSoCal

(9,736 posts)

4. It was a bug of some sort - for days it was gibberish.

Reply to hon3y (Reply #3)

Thu Sep 10, 2015, 06:23 PM

Sep 2015

It 's fixed now. Don' t know if it was me or them.

Reply to this discussion