Yahoo's own history of fake news.
Their factuality doesn’t rely on who reports them.
It actually does. You might as well quote an L. Ron Hubbard novel as Yahoo and claim it as "fact".
Is this a religious belief on your part? Or simply a psychological tendency to bury your head in the sand and deny what you don’t want to be true?
Not religion. Quite the opposite. Extreme skepticism of any and all "news" from sources which have demonstrated themselves as purveyors of BS for well over a decade. Is it your tendency to bury your head up the ass of whomever is telling you something that you want to believe and hope is true? Even knowing that the one telling you is a proven chronic liar.
Yahoo...really? After all this time you've learned nothing?
Amazing.
“Their factuality doesn’t rely on who reports them.”
“It actually does.”
No, it does not. That is the classic logical fallacy of ad hominem. Facts have their own independent validity.
If Yahoo or L. Ron Hubbard say the sky is blue, that does not make it some other color. The date does not change, because it is listed on a Yahoo story.
Please pardon me if I don’t respond further. This is not a discussion that I want to spend a lot of time engaging in. Believe what you want.
Rejecting a story exclusively because of the source is called “the genetic fallacy”.
I agree with you that Yahoo is a terrible and left-slanted part of the MSM. But this story, that comes from behind the Fortune paywall, seems worth reading and considering based on its own merits and demerits. And it does seem to have stimulated an enlightening discussion.
So I think it is fair to warn about Yahoo, but not to simply ignore and dismiss all articles published there. I save ignore and dismiss for the January 6th committee, and all the propaganda it creates.