Here's your periodic reminder not to be irresponsible or manipulative when sharing links. Knowing is half the battle before you start spouting bad sources:
News -- This is news. It is fact-checked, verified, and references credible, relevant sources or interviewees specific to the story or event. It strives to be as objective as possible, sticks to actual data parsed by multiple experts, and always provides a counterpoint(s) for credible discussion (questioning an interviewee who claims the earth is flat or continuing to cite debunked theories about massive scale election interference isn't a credible opposing point, for example). It focuses on the who, what, where, and when of a story or event.
Analysis -- This is not news. This is someone's breakdown of what he/she/they feel are the takeaways from actual news or some event. This one confuses many people because the person presenting the opinions is usually some kind of expert in a matter related to what he/she/they are analyzing, such as pundits discussing a presidential debate or a legal expert discussing how a court case plays out. However, even though the analysts are experts , they tend to have a vested interest in promoting one side of an issue over the other side, such as a conservative pundit for a conservative news station or a climate change attorney for climate change rulings. The best examples of this include a variety of experts who can discuss and even disagree with each other, providing the experts are peer-respected, tenured, and credible (again, there's no point in including flat earth "scientists" for a credible discussion of geology or a pillow salesman or pop star for a discussion of world politics).
Opinion/Editorial -- This is not news. This is someone's opinion (quite often a complaining, partisan one) about some issue or event. I'm surprised how often I see people reference these as facts or news because they are quite often clearly identified as just Op/Ed in the papers or sites they appear in/on. (Although some sources do incorrectly and irresponsibly let these appear alongside news stories as a counterpoint to news.) Sadly, this can often masquerade as Analysis and confuse those who are looking for quick, easy "facts" (not actually facts though) to support their preconceived beliefs.
Review -- This is not news. This is an assessment by a professional critic regarding (typically) some published media.
Political Memes -- Not only are these not news, they are often flat-out lies and falsehoods. Unless they cite a credible source in the meme, these are typically unverified and intentionally misleading or designed to elicit an emotional, knee-jerk response. If it has no source, just don't share it. You could do more harm than good. If it does have a source, check it out before sharing it. Chances are the source is made up to provide false credibility or designed to take an actual quote or fact out of context. And trust me, we've all been fooled at least once by these pesky critters.
Most YouTube sources fall under Analysis, Op/Ed, or Review. There are some that actually do the work of journalism to present news.
Most podcasters tend to fall under the Analyst-Op/Ed-Review category as well, though there are a few credible investigative journalism podcasts that report relatively unbiased news.
It's okay to share Op/Ed and Analysis articles. But please don't source it as news. Always be sure to explain that it is merely an opinion, albeit in some cases a more informed opinion, but an opinion nonetheless. If you intentionally imply that such a source is news or is a factual account of a story or event, you are irresponsible at best and outright spreading lies and trying to manipulate others at worst.
Most partisan sources that identify as such promote bias and don't actually cover news. They inject a lot of Analysis and Op/Ed into so-called news stories.
.jpg)
