Fun fact: every single time someone writes this, whatever follows is guaranteed to be an outrageous strawman that in no way it's what the other person was saying.

[–] Zabjam@feddit.org -1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Sure buddy. It is still irrelevant. It is not hypocritical to ciritice a source. You don't have to prove a different point to bring forward criticism. The only question should be "is the criticism valid?" And not "do you have a better point?"

[–] BrainInABox@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

And the answer to that question is "there’s no such thing as a source with no bias"

[–] Zabjam@feddit.org -1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

No it is not. That's only an answer if one thinks that every sources bias is as bad as any other, which was rejected earlier as "outrages strawman". Under the assumption that sources can be more or less biased, it is worth questioning the bias and the statement "there's no such thing as a source with no bias" is a moot point.