Not once you look at it.
Quote:
|
Covered to an extent. None of the events listed in op are what you would call "covered", and certainly not updated.
|
Rubbish.
Take that MSNBC piece which is a workup of a NYT piece, both of which are certainly mainstream. See how often the subject has been updated since the cited article, then look back at the archives and see how many years they have been updating the story for...or should that be decades
Alex Jones is always an old reliable when it comes to crazyness, I wonder if he pops up
Quote:
|
Yep, adverts on websites, hot diggity dog. Now there's a new thing.
|
The problem there being that those are the articles on the end of the world doomsday "newsoutlet" that is linked to in the opening article
I think the problem here FF is that you have linked to an article and are defending what it says without even looking at what it is claiming and the "evidence" it presents
edit to add, sorry I just noticed the source itself runs lots of panic buy gold now "news" articles as well as running lots of buy gold adverts, so it isn't just a case of it linking to dodgy "news outlets" it really is crazy one itself.