Some sites are very good at hiding their bias. I mean, that you really have to be pretty seasoned to pick up that any give article is leaning this way or that. And that's good. It shows that they're at least trying to be non biased.
Gawkers is blatantly left bias. Articles, if you can call then that, read like they were written by activists or members of a student newspaper. Very amateur, even blatantly untrue and spun to fit an agenda.
Their commenting system is very antiquated and unsophisticated. The moderators of the comment section allow all manner of insult, yet edit out any right wing views.
I tested this when challenged by a friend who introduced me to Gawker. I posted a comment that I deliberately structured with a right wing slant, albeit, unoffensive, tame, and no foul language. And it wasn't accepted.
I tried three times on three accounts, with different right wing opinions. None were accepted.
So be aware that if you want balanced news, you would likely need to read Gawker News, then Fox News, and even then, you'd probably end up with no real idea of what the real truth of the story was.
My recommendation: Avoid.
'Sponsored' articles that look identical to real articles, insane vigilantly obsession with Rob Ford, and inaccurate/immature reporting. Not good.
Customer Questions & Answers
Votes Thanks for voting!
Did You Find This Page Useful?
Business owners: What’s your side of the story?
Manage your business