> I was not trying to imply that this does not deserve investigation. I just thought that it was relevant to point out the agenda or ideological bias of the source because it helps to know these kinds of things.
As noble as your intentions may be, it's unnecessary and muddies the conversation if you keep adding cherry-picked information about your view of the politics of those involved.
Also, "left-wing" and "right-wing" are not particularly useful terms as they are ill defined and vary from place to place (e.g. the U.S. left-wing is considered very right-wing in most of Europe).
The views of the politics of those involved is not controversial. They are very much part of the American left, as their X feed makes abundantly clear.
As I understand it, X is a cesspit of right-wing hate and vitriol, so I wouldn't trust their evaluation of "left". As I said, it's really not a useful term to use and you're diverting the discussion away from the issues involved to a discussion of politics instead. Your comments come across as if you're trying to push a specific narrative.
I think where an outlet stands in the larger political landscape is useful context and there's nothing distracting or inappropriate about bringing it up, so we can agree to disagree.
I don't plan on visiting that site whilst it's being run by a blatant Nazi. There was a literal world war to stop that kind of evil and yet people seem to have forgotten. I hope you are not one of those people - I'm always suspicious of anyone that continues to use X/Twitter.
It's funny, Musk has enough money to end world hunger and instead he decides to be a complete arsehole.
I couldn't open their X because it's a technological abomination, but their Bluesky doesn't paint the image of a blatantly left-wing and super partisan channel that willingly ignores reporting on the public sector.
Amongst the top 10 things I saw them complaining about a state government, public regulators not doing their job well… it's not dramatic.
Maybe it's my European lens indeed, but it seems like a generic centrist media outlet, with maybe an anti-elites edge, which I'd expect from the Fourth Estate.
As noble as your intentions may be, it's unnecessary and muddies the conversation if you keep adding cherry-picked information about your view of the politics of those involved.
Also, "left-wing" and "right-wing" are not particularly useful terms as they are ill defined and vary from place to place (e.g. the U.S. left-wing is considered very right-wing in most of Europe).