So expressing dissatisfaction at the quality of zerohedge articles lays waste to your sacred cow, eh, DE ?
Interesting takeaway (your reaction) to a far more accurate portrayal of the situation than zilchohedge came even close to presenting, and a FAR better sourced (broad spectrum) portrayal - with ample documentation and sources in the Grok conversation.
Ignore zilcho at my own peril ?
Ok - risk noted. But not much of one to an aggregator of inaccurate left-wing articles (in this case).
I would counter: Use zerohedge at your own risk. They are only two steps above the typical supermarket tabloid, and barely half a step above the average click-bait-fear-mongering sites. Aggregating, when MOST sources are far-left wing, does not make for 'good reporting'. Zerohedge goes for clicks, not accuracy.
As for GROK being 'left wing' - How so, in this case ?
As a super-aggregator, the GIGO principle above applies - but the back-and-forth gave a pretty damn accurate picture, and heavily filtered out your claimed 'left wing' bias.
I challenged the scenario presented by zero's extremely biased article, and by association Fiz's reaction to it - with well documented sources, and a well reasoned, thorough, angle of inquiry.
Zerohedge completely failed to do so.
Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good ...
| 
