B1tF1ghter: Kotaku, THEMSELVES, through THEIR OWN articles, have proven they are "GENERALLY unreliable" source of information.
...
If you KNOW **most** of the articles from the given sources are lacking information, and are flexing the remains, ARE YOU going to go to them again?
...
In other words, listing Kotaku url as a "source" is going to be automatically DISREGARDED and laughed at by virtually all people familiar with their shody practises.
...
It's really that simple.
It is really simple! You are right. And no need to "dumb it down" for anyone.
This is the sequence of events so far:
1. You have acategorically dismissed the Kotaku article due to it being from Kotaku.
2. You claimed (many times) that everyone knows it's unreliable, inaccurate and without journalistic integrity. You claimed there is a proven track record of this.
3. I asked, that since it's proven and established, where is the proof? What are you basing this on? What are for example the factual inaccuracies in the Sweet Baby Inc. article?
4. You provide nothing to back up what you said, instead doubling down, and repeating (with CAPS!!!) the same words, as if speaking louder will make me understand it better.
Do you maybe see now why I asked you those eight, admittedly slightly leading, questions? No? Well let me "dumb it down" for you. It was to expose the fact that your own prejudice completely took over you and in a knee-jerk reaction, you went ahead to boycott anything a media source says, based on what you've heard in alternative sources that do conform to your beliefs. As I suspected, you have not used any critical thinking to evaluate the article and source yourself. To be honest, at this point, I seriously doubt you ever even read the article, as you nerd-raged frothing at the mouth crusading against "wokeness".
I would have absolutely no issue here, if you had at least read the article, and argued how badly written it was, how lopsided the portrayal of the issue was towards one "side", how there were factual inaccuracies or that you found plenty to contradict what Kotaku or Sweet Baby Inc. were saying. However, I do object to people boycotting a source outright, based on hearsay, and no critical thinking. Just jumping on the hate bandwagon, because it's popular and populist and cool, and you relinquish your ability to assess a source yourself. That, ladies and gentlemen, is why I am taking the effort to respond to your walls of text.
It is especially baffling, how people won't even read an article from a source, yet talk about learning about the issue from "both sides". Hell, even I don't dismiss Fox News or the Daily Caller outright, even though they both at the very least portray the issue one-dimensionally, and usually (especially the latter) are full of misinformation and propaganda. It is completely against my beliefs, which follow that everyone should keep learning, and practicing their critical thinking skills.
The rest of your post is full of you going line by line, being contrarian to every single sentence, whilst inserting CAPS for every third word. Which is what you do. Which is fine. It's a free anonymous forum. Who cares. But I won't be doing the same "courtesy" to you. Be thankful!
We probably will never circle back to my original eight questions, which is a shame, but I don't really mind if the discussion goes forward.