Are we really allowing articles from Fox News here now? FN clearly violates rule 3. Even if this particular story is sound, it just legitimizes them as an org and all of the other bonkers stuff they put out.
this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2023
1 points (51.2% liked)
World News
39004 readers
2910 users here now
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
From your link:
Straight news reporting from beat reporters is generally fact-based and accurate, which earns them a Mixed factual rating.
My second point stands.
Just because an outlet that spews made up nonsense and outright lies throws you a factual bone once in a while, it doesn't make them credible. Hence the "low credibility "rating.
Fair point. I just fire up Google News and check headlines. Some are from Fox and some of those are fact-based. I didn't consider the source, only the content (though I do consider the source when I begin reading anything from Fox). I know they're mostly trash and lies.
Are you joking?
Parents are grieving and I hesitate to judge their irrational actions because grief isn’t a logical process.
They think they’re saving their child by refusing to say good bye. Unfortunately they’re being enabled by people with political agendas.
First of all, there is no reason to believe that this child is doomed to a life of suffering. Palliative care has come a long way, and people with terminal illnesses can almost always be made comfortable until the end arrives.
Furthermore, Terri Schiavo was not braindead, she was in a vegetative state. When someone is declared braindead they are legally dead and will immediately be taken to the morgue (stopping by the operating room if they are an organ donor.)
Terri Schiavo could breathe on her own, so by definition she was not braindead. In the US, when someone is incapacitated their family is responsible for determining what medical care they would have wanted.
Schiavo's husband determined that she would not want life support. The courts supported his determination because he was her next of kin. If her husband had determined she wanted life support, the courts would have supported that too. That's markedly different from the decision making in the OP.
This has happened a couple times in the UK. It's a lot different than the USA for a few reasons, one being the NHS isn't gonna waste money on someone who has like a .0001% chance of recovery (and why should they?).
These decisions aren't about the cost of care, they're about the interests of the individual and, in this case, not prolonging suffering unnecessarily.
This issue is coming up that it won't be NHS resources being used because the baby will be in Italy using a Technically Private hospital, in Italy. There isn't a good reason to deny that, especially when the baby has Italian citizenship.
There is very good reason to deny it when it will only prolong suffering. That a fascist government has hopped on a Christo-fascist bandwagon is irrelevant. Her condition is incurable and she is suffering.
Non-Fox report here: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/nov/12/indi-gregory-critically-ill-baby-girl-removed-from-life-support
Last Monday, Indi was granted emergency Italian citizenship less than an hour before medical staff were due to withdraw life support treatment.
and here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-67378132
So the baby should die in part... Because of politics? The rest of what you have is fair but really?
No. The baby should not be forced to suffer because of politics.
There is no reason to assume the child must be suffering. People with access to palliative care usually are not suffering, even if they have a terminal illness.
I'm not assuming anything. That is the basis of the medics' decision and the court's ruling.
If her doctors are unable to manage pain then her parents should be allowed to find doctors who can.
She isn't the first child with this disease, after all. And withdrawal of support is certainly not standard of care for patients like her.
People with ALS also have a terminal condition that requires life support. Maybe the NHS will start removing their ventilators too, to spare them further suffering.