What do you think about lifesitenews?

  • Thread starter Thread starter JamalChristophr
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JamalChristophr

Guest
They seem to be very anti- Pope Francis. How would you characterize their credibility in general?
 
I genuinely don’t know how credible they are but the way they report is too bad for me to be reading it seriously. I don’t trust reports when they are unnecessarily heavy with journalists’ emotions.
 
Last edited:
They have been a journalistic train wreck for about a decade now. I don’t think they are all bad, but their editorial approach is the type of approach that is destroying our culture right now.
 
Yeah, I don’t visit that site because of the constant Pope-bashing. Although, it is hard not to be sympathetic to his critics. I’m pretty weary of the constant PR disasters.
 
Not a fan, but will read articles therein for a bit of different perspective.
 
I learned not to trust them, is that bad?
 
Last edited:
I have not put them under the microscope yet, but I guess it seems they put an extreme spin on things, such that they are barely worth reading sometimes, and generally often detrimental to read if you don’t look for an alternative view point. Seems like very poor journalism to me.

The problem is that they have a huge media presence for one reason or another. They are so prominent on google. I kind of wonder if someone does not wish to undermine the Pope. Naahh, that can’t be it.
 
Last edited:
They do report a lot of negative news coming out of the Vatican, but the reality is, there IS a lot of negative or confusing stuff coming out of the Vatican. A website does not need to “spin” most of the news to make it look contradictory. Clarification has become the 5th mark of the Church.

During the reigns of JP II, and Benedict, there was also occasional PR blunders, and occasional negative or mixed messages, it is true. But there also was a considerable amount of sound doctrinal leadership communicated. None of that exists now. (Can you imagine anything remotely like “Theology of the Body” teaching nowadays?) Essentially we are hearing NY Times editorials.

If Lifesitenews comes across at times as angry and rowdy, ok, yeah, they are a little of that. But there are reasons. There is a definite lack of something solid nowadays, that we recently had, and that lack is hard to report on. So we get the angry/rowdy.
 
Last edited:
From their “about” page:
“ LifeSiteNews Principles
  1. Accuracy in content is given high priority. News and information tips from readers are encouraged and validated. Valid corrections are always welcome. Writing and research is of a professional calibre.
  2. LifeSiteNews.com emphasizes the social worth of traditional Judeo-Christian principles but is also respectful of all authentic religions and cultures that esteem life, family and universal norms of morality.
  3. LifeSiteNews.com’s writers and its founders, have come to understand that respect for life and family are endangered by an international conflict. That conflict is between radically opposed views of the worth and dignity of every human life and of family life and community. It has been caused by secularists attempting to eliminate Christian morality and natural law principles which are seen as the primary obstacles to implementing their new world order.
  4. LifeSiteNews.com understands that abortion, euthanasia, cloning, homosexuality and all other moral, life and family issues are all interconnected in an international conflict affecting all nations, even at the most local levels. LifeSiteNews attempts to provide its readers with the big picture and the most useful and up-to-date information on this conflict.
  5. LifeSiteNews.com attempts to dispel confusion and ignorance, enable constructive dialogue and help informed decisions to be made and appropriate actions to be taken for the good of all.”
 
From LifeSiteNews.com
“Who Produces LifeSiteNews?

The service was originally started by Campaign Life Coalition (CLC), a Canadian national pro-life organization headquartered in Toronto, Canada. Campaign Life Coalition, founded in 1978, was one of the first pro-life organizations to emphasize the international dimension of attacks on life and family. Along with a few other groups it pioneered pro-life lobbying at United Nations conferences. CLC president, Jim Hughes, is currently also vice-president of the International Right to Life Federation.

CLC’s international dimension spurred the development of LifeSiteNews as an international news service. LifeSiteNews.com U.S. and Canada are now separate incorporated non-profit organizations, are not involved in direct political action and do not support or oppose political candidates or parties. LifeSiteNews is strictly a news and information service.“
 
Looks legit to me. People sharing criticism of the Pope is just opinion. As long as it’s done charitably and in the spirit of fraternal correction, I don’t see a problem. 🙂
 
They often spread stories that stretch the facts or are simply not true. I do not trust them.
 
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Enough said
 
They do focus on the negative and the shocking but sometimes they can be the only source that gives information. I find them useful and on occasion use them as a source.
 
it is just another source of information.
i judge the story
no site is right 100% of the time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top