Auch für Schweizer Medien gilt: Der Unterschied zwischen Verschwörungstheorie und Fakt ist einfach 5 Jahre Zeit

by Proteus_Dagon

8 comments

  4. Wett da nöd behaupte das 20minute e verlässlichi quälle isch… Die läbed halt immer vo de klicks und schriebed jede furz zum d’läser bewege de artikel öffne will das ja werbe-iinahme generiert…
    Aber ganz so eifach wie uf dem Screenshot isches halt au nöd. Da werdet es Stuck wiit unterschiedlichi Ussage mitenand vergliche.

  6. I don’t see the problem? They are just reporting what the Bundesnachrichtendienst is stating, not that it is correct?

    Edit: Lots of German media, including Spiegel, Zeit, ZDF and BR are reporting it, too, by the way.

  7. I don’t see the point you’re trying to make.

    If a claim lacks sufficient data or evidence but is still spread as fact, those doing so are considered conspiracy theorists. If later evidence validates the claim, they are no longer conspiracy theorists.

    Plenty of theories have gained credibility over time as more evidence emerged just as others, like Flat Earth theory, have been completely debunked. So, where’s the confusion or “conspiracy” behind your post?

  8. But this also means that it is still possible that some poor fool has consumed a magical bat and thus brought a curse upon mankind. I mean 5-20% chance according to the BND that this is what happened.

    That we have more knowledge 5 years later is actually logical, it has little to do with bad journalism.

Comments are closed.