Politico is owned by the german Axel Springer SE, a publisher that also owns Bild, Fakt (polish) and Welt among others.

The publisher and its news outlets (with the aforementioned Bild, Fakt and Welt most prominent) is a main driver for a news coverage and reporting that is jointly responsible for the rise of the far right in Germany and Europe.

Politico itself has published so-called Native Ads, a form of advertisng that is designed like op-ed articles and other opinion pieces in a way that is hard to differeentiate from regular, non-sponsored content, mostly for fossile fuel companies but also healt insurance, finance and weapons industries. (Source 1, Source 2).

That sums up to a news outlet that should not be shared, not be trusted and hence, not be posted here. It was not an issue mostly since this outlet wasn’t posted here often , but recently, Politico articles are getting posted very frequently again, so I suggest the ban now.

Edit: lost a word

Edit 2: it should be noted that there is another publisher with a similar name (Springer Nature with several subsidiaries), but that company os not affiliated with Axel Springer SE and has different issues.

  • bossito@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    47 minutes ago

    It’s not like there’s an abundance of EU focused titles. They often have good and pertinent articles, just judge by article.

    Outright banning one of the most influential sites in the EU bubble is just making this corner of the internet even more blind sighted by extreme left orthodoxy instead of being a corner of healthy and interesting debate.

  • rumschlumpel@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    54 minutes ago

    Is there any option between banning and doing nothing? I do get the impression that some of their articles are decent, and I would agree that they’re not that right wing in general (in contrast to Bild and Welt).

  • catharso@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    2 hours ago

    i think it is necessary to occasionally see what ‘the other side’ is pushing, just to be prepared.

    so i’d say autotagging posts pointing to certain domains with a “warning” label (like for example https://ground.news/ is doing) might be the better approach.

    but lemmy afaik does not have a feature like this; so banning might be the next best thing 🤷🏻‍♀️

    • CyberEgg@discuss.tchncs.deOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      2 hours ago

      I wouldn’t care if it was every now and then, but recently the frequency of Politico articles being shared here has skyrocketed - mostly by a single user, but I have seen them being posted by others, too.

      • Pip@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Yes, they have some well written and researched articles, which I shared.

        • Pip@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 hour ago

          The wikipedia article section this links to highlights that the publisher endorses : US European alliance, reconciliation between Germans and Jews, support for Israel, European integration, oppositikon to PiS. Not exactly a far right rag then.

          • Zombie@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            45 minutes ago

            You’re so deep down the Overton Window that none of those things register as explicitly far right to you?

            US European alliance

            America is snatching people off the streets, silencing dissenting voices, threatening countries with both economic and military attack, and building concentration camps.

            support for Israel

            Israel is a genocidal ethno-state.


            The 2025 letter has been signed by over 7500 citizens, 400 academics, including 31 Nobel Prize winners.

            As in 1925, we scientists, philosophers, writers, artists and citizens of the world, have a responsibility to denounce and resist the resurgence of fascism in all its forms. We call on all those who value democracy to act:

            • Defend democratic, cultural and educational institutions. Call out abuses of democratic principles and human rights. Refuse preemptive compliance.
            • Join collective actions, locally and internationally. Boycott and strike when possible. Make resistance impossible to ignore and costly to repress.
            • Uphold facts and evidence. Foster critical thinking and engage with your communities on these grounds.

            https://stopreturnfascism.org/english/

            • Pip@feddit.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              34 minutes ago

              Nope, the wikipedia article referred to the transatlantic alliance which Trump and others are now dismantling. That is what the publisher endorsed : the transatlantic alliance established after WWII.

              Support for the existence of Israel is mainstream, yes. Even though it committed war crimes that will probably soon be judged as a genocide by court.

              Fully with you on fighting fascism. Not the same as fighting conservatives and the center right.

  • Edens Zero@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Maybe instead of banning, add a disclaimer tag instead? I have no idea about the overhead for the moderators or if automation is a possibility.

  • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 hours ago

    We use Politico all the time as a generally reliable source on Wikipedia. The sponsored content is obviously shitty, but it’s clearly distinguished by its “Sponsored” mark. If that goes, then banning it as a source might be a level-headed response.

      • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        43 minutes ago

        We’re keenly aware of Politico’s controversies when we use them as a reliable source. We consider them to have a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy, and sorry to say, we’re generally better at sussing that out than most people – not inherently but because that’s what years of writing encyclopedic prose does to a mf.

        • Zombie@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          32 minutes ago

          Is the average social media user capable of sussing out fact from fiction as rigorously though?

          This discussion is about their potential for propaganda and viewpoint manipulation on Lemmy after all, not as a citation in an encyclopaedia.

          Of their many daily articles how many would be deemed acceptable to Wikipedia and how many not? There must be a ratio where Wikipedia calls time. As Wikipedia only picks the parts that are relevant, the untrustworthy articles would be ignored. That’s not the case on social media though where some users are spamming articles as if it’s an RSS feed.

          As Lemmy/PieFed grows in users, the likelihood of bogus articles climbing up people’s feeds, legitimising the articles, also increases.

          This is an issue that needs nipped in the bud earlier rather than later IMO.