This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Occupy Democrats article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The following Wikipedia contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
conflict of interest,
autobiography, and
neutral point of view.
|
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
{{subst:trim|1= Occupy Democrats' is a United States-based, left-wing media outlet built around a Facebook Group and corresponding website. Established in 2012 to counterbalance the Republican "Tea Party" online presence, it publishes memes and links to media stories relating to United States politics. Some critics have accused Occupy Democrats of spreading false information, [7] hyperpartisan content, [11]
FenrirKyramud ( talk) 05:05, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
References
lat
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).atlantic
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).asan
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).iowa
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).king
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).rae
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).To construct the political disinformation sample, we focused on Facebook posts from ten popular sources that are known for promulgating political disinformation in Facebook...Among the selected hyper-partisan disinformation sources...Addicting Info, AlterNet, Daily KOS, and Occupy Democrats are extreme Liberal.
The term "fake news"...expanded to include hyper-partisan news sites like Breitbart, DailyCaller, and Occupy Democrats...
{{
cite web}}
: Missing or empty |url=
(
help)
This article is extremely biased. 2602:306:83B3:6D20:68AB:6831:B9BA:479A ( talk) 06:58, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
Lots of misleading information in the wiki Arashitora ( talk) 13:07, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
They are not totally anti-gun. In February 2022 they approved and cheered Ukraine president handing out rifles to civilians [1] Joaeko ( talk) 15:54, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
Dear All,
I am the new Executive Editor of Occupy Democrats having started implementing journalistic controls in 2020 and taking over the news website in 2022. As our masthead indicates (there was not one in the past), the Rivero brothers are solely acting in the capacity of website publishers now, they don't control the newsroom in an editorial capacity (or even enter its chatroom). We properly handle the news, opinion, and analysis stories. That is why we earned a 100/100 rating from NewsGuard for our truthful portrayal of the news and our improved journalistic practices. Our journalism criteria and pledge to the public are here:
https://occupydemocrats.com/about-us/
But this is not just a short-term improvement over the poor stories written starting in 2017. The site received a poor rating from NewsGuard, an independent 3rd-party rating company that assigns real people to thoroughly review a site's content. They reviewed two years' worth of our content, questioned our sources, and sometimes pointed out articles that required correction. Anyone with a Microsoft Edge browser can see the NewsGuard rating for free, and the rating history.
https://www.newsguardtech.com/ratings/rating-process-criteria/
What changed? Our implementation of new criteria for handling news/opinion/analysis stories (older stories are labeled as legacy reports or "politics" but do not fall under the new system) and our multi-year track record of correcting inaccuracies when discovered, purging the website of anonymous author's accounts, and a complete break with old editors and old policies that lacked the essential disclosures the public needed to evaluate our work. On top of that, OccupyDemocrats.com retained an entirely new staff of four writers who are both reputable and contribute quality content to our website, including exclusive reports observing journalistic standards for confirming information before publication, and seeking comment when appropriate.
It is understood that past editorial management at the OccupyDemocrats.com website was opaque and did not adhere to any known standards, but that is we have worked tremendously to re-orient our news offering to be a high-value complement to the meme makers' opinion posts and other content on the Facebook page. The Facebook page team constantly strives for accuracy too, but as noted, gets more attention for its mistakes which it ALWAYS corrects when discovered - this is verifiable too - which is the journalistically appropriate way to handle erroneous content.
I write all of this in the hopes that someone will review the OccupyDemocrats.com website and the NewsGuard rating and update the heading of our Wikipedia appropriately. Wikipedia is considered a basic resource for millions of people, but our listing focuses on events that are often 5-7 years in the past and overlooks other things that would show both the website and the Facebook page to be extremely prolific and only occasionally erroneous. A team of people works hard to publish approximately 15,000 pieces of content onto Facebook annually, alongside the website's 2000-3000 stories. But fact checks draw the most attention, not the thousands of wholly accurate posts or the ones that are simply political opinions and not a matter of fact or not.
Thank you,
Grant grantstern@gmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grantstern ( talk • contribs) 18:21, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
This article was edited by someone who was biased against the platform, they provided no evidence to support their claim that this platform is actually hyperpartisan, or publishes false information or clickbait. Please correct. 2601:602:CA00:A900:E4F8:9092:BF5F:7BC3 ( talk) 18:46, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
In the "evaluation by media" section, none of the recent fact checks include that the erroneous posts were later corrected. The links to those posts are within the fact checks.
None of that section distinguishes that it is only about Facebook posts and not about the editorially independent news website.
Also, please see my reply to the edit request below.
Lastly, see the commentary below that this listing uses years-old articles to falsely portray Occupy Democrats as an organization whose mission is to spread misinformation when in fact, there are no false fact checks about our editorial news website, and 100% of Facebook posts with errors have been corrected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grantstern ( talk • contribs) 00:40, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Occupy Democrats article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The following Wikipedia contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
conflict of interest,
autobiography, and
neutral point of view.
|
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
{{subst:trim|1= Occupy Democrats' is a United States-based, left-wing media outlet built around a Facebook Group and corresponding website. Established in 2012 to counterbalance the Republican "Tea Party" online presence, it publishes memes and links to media stories relating to United States politics. Some critics have accused Occupy Democrats of spreading false information, [7] hyperpartisan content, [11]
FenrirKyramud ( talk) 05:05, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
References
lat
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).atlantic
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).asan
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).iowa
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).king
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).rae
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).To construct the political disinformation sample, we focused on Facebook posts from ten popular sources that are known for promulgating political disinformation in Facebook...Among the selected hyper-partisan disinformation sources...Addicting Info, AlterNet, Daily KOS, and Occupy Democrats are extreme Liberal.
The term "fake news"...expanded to include hyper-partisan news sites like Breitbart, DailyCaller, and Occupy Democrats...
{{
cite web}}
: Missing or empty |url=
(
help)
This article is extremely biased. 2602:306:83B3:6D20:68AB:6831:B9BA:479A ( talk) 06:58, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
Lots of misleading information in the wiki Arashitora ( talk) 13:07, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
They are not totally anti-gun. In February 2022 they approved and cheered Ukraine president handing out rifles to civilians [1] Joaeko ( talk) 15:54, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
Dear All,
I am the new Executive Editor of Occupy Democrats having started implementing journalistic controls in 2020 and taking over the news website in 2022. As our masthead indicates (there was not one in the past), the Rivero brothers are solely acting in the capacity of website publishers now, they don't control the newsroom in an editorial capacity (or even enter its chatroom). We properly handle the news, opinion, and analysis stories. That is why we earned a 100/100 rating from NewsGuard for our truthful portrayal of the news and our improved journalistic practices. Our journalism criteria and pledge to the public are here:
https://occupydemocrats.com/about-us/
But this is not just a short-term improvement over the poor stories written starting in 2017. The site received a poor rating from NewsGuard, an independent 3rd-party rating company that assigns real people to thoroughly review a site's content. They reviewed two years' worth of our content, questioned our sources, and sometimes pointed out articles that required correction. Anyone with a Microsoft Edge browser can see the NewsGuard rating for free, and the rating history.
https://www.newsguardtech.com/ratings/rating-process-criteria/
What changed? Our implementation of new criteria for handling news/opinion/analysis stories (older stories are labeled as legacy reports or "politics" but do not fall under the new system) and our multi-year track record of correcting inaccuracies when discovered, purging the website of anonymous author's accounts, and a complete break with old editors and old policies that lacked the essential disclosures the public needed to evaluate our work. On top of that, OccupyDemocrats.com retained an entirely new staff of four writers who are both reputable and contribute quality content to our website, including exclusive reports observing journalistic standards for confirming information before publication, and seeking comment when appropriate.
It is understood that past editorial management at the OccupyDemocrats.com website was opaque and did not adhere to any known standards, but that is we have worked tremendously to re-orient our news offering to be a high-value complement to the meme makers' opinion posts and other content on the Facebook page. The Facebook page team constantly strives for accuracy too, but as noted, gets more attention for its mistakes which it ALWAYS corrects when discovered - this is verifiable too - which is the journalistically appropriate way to handle erroneous content.
I write all of this in the hopes that someone will review the OccupyDemocrats.com website and the NewsGuard rating and update the heading of our Wikipedia appropriately. Wikipedia is considered a basic resource for millions of people, but our listing focuses on events that are often 5-7 years in the past and overlooks other things that would show both the website and the Facebook page to be extremely prolific and only occasionally erroneous. A team of people works hard to publish approximately 15,000 pieces of content onto Facebook annually, alongside the website's 2000-3000 stories. But fact checks draw the most attention, not the thousands of wholly accurate posts or the ones that are simply political opinions and not a matter of fact or not.
Thank you,
Grant grantstern@gmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grantstern ( talk • contribs) 18:21, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
This article was edited by someone who was biased against the platform, they provided no evidence to support their claim that this platform is actually hyperpartisan, or publishes false information or clickbait. Please correct. 2601:602:CA00:A900:E4F8:9092:BF5F:7BC3 ( talk) 18:46, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
In the "evaluation by media" section, none of the recent fact checks include that the erroneous posts were later corrected. The links to those posts are within the fact checks.
None of that section distinguishes that it is only about Facebook posts and not about the editorially independent news website.
Also, please see my reply to the edit request below.
Lastly, see the commentary below that this listing uses years-old articles to falsely portray Occupy Democrats as an organization whose mission is to spread misinformation when in fact, there are no false fact checks about our editorial news website, and 100% of Facebook posts with errors have been corrected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grantstern ( talk • contribs) 00:40, 11 January 2023 (UTC)