Lisa Lawler had no reason to suspect Const. Boris Borissov but now her opinion of police has changed — she’s convinced other grieving families have been victims of similar thefts

      • Old_Geezer@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        A single website source like that is even worse of a source than Wikipedia…

        Not really, it’s as representative as anything else out there, which reinforces my point. There is no common meaning for ‘Defund the Police’. You are just pissing in the wind.

        • joshhsoj1902@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          I’ll go back to my earlier point. Wikipedia is a fine place to start to get a summary of all the different aspects of defunding the police, you’re focused on a single source when there isn’t a single definition of the movement overall.

          • Old_Geezer@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            I’ll go back to my earlier point. Wikipedia is a fine place to start to get a summary of all the different aspects of defunding the police, you’re focused on a single source when there isn’t a single definition of the movement overall.

            Absolutely not for anything political related. It’s a well-known fact that the deep state authors many of that type of article. It’s great for official propaganda. BTW, I gave 2 sources indicating the same meaning, so I’m not focusing on a single entity, plus my experience talking to on the ground black activists in Toronto as to the meaning.

            • joshhsoj1902@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              6 months ago

              Yep, being aware of that is part of being able to read anything objectively. Every single thing you read has a political slant.

              Wikipedia is great because it does reference out to sources, so you can easily find multiple sources and using critical thinking skills you can distill common themes across multiple different sources.

              If you’re savvy, you can even look at the page edit history and the “talk” happening behind the article to get a better idea of what parts are disputed and which are generally accepted.

                • joshhsoj1902@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  Even with everything said, wikipedia is generally a better single source than anything else.

                  At the very least, it’s always an acceptable starting point for understanding the concepts in a space.