I've the opposite review on R/Politics actually. It's one of the worst subs for absolute hysteria - and is a chore to read after a while.
It can be a bit, but I get a better context of the story through reading the conversations about the story than I do through any other means. The way that only certain, reliable, publications are allowed to be posted is a big plus.
I always take Reddit and Twitter with a big pinch of salt - there's a lot of ignorance and people can come out with or believe the biggest load of rubbish.
As I say, it's representative of the whole Internet.
The one USP that Reddit has is that a lot of the rubbish gets downvoted and therefore hidden or relegated to the bottom. It's a feature I wish a lot of other forums had.... I'd use it a lot on here!
The whole Boston Bomber saga was a particular lowpoint.
Yes that was disastrous for its reputation, there's been a few of those - the whole The_Donald section is another. However not every user sees the controversial stuff as by its very nature you only get the sections you want appearing. It's different to Twitter in that respect as it's topic based rather than person based
Last edited by Inspector Sands on 25 November 2019 7:20am