‘Frightening’ Taliban law bans women from speaking in public
‘Frightening’ Taliban law bans women from speaking in public
New vice and virtue restrictions offer ‘a distressing vision of Afghanistan’s future’, says UN
New Taliban laws that prohibit women from speaking or showing their faces outside their homes have been condemned by the UN and met with horror by human rights groups.
The Taliban published a host of new “vice and virtue” laws last week, approved by their supreme leader Hibatullah Akhundzada, which state that women must completely veil their bodies – including their faces – in thick clothing at all times in public to avoid leading men into temptation and vice.
Women’s voices are also deemed to be potential instruments of vice and so will not be allowed to be heard in public under the new restrictions. Women must also not be heard singing or reading aloud, even from inside their houses.
You're viewing a single thread.
Please don't link MBFC. It is itself biased and inconsistent.
For example the Guardian has the same credibility rating as Breitbart. With far fewer failed fact checks.
You're wrong. Request denied!
Have a good one though.
They're not agreeing that The Guardian and Breitbart are on a level. They're complaining that MBFC ranks them the same when Breitbart is clearly a much more biased and less reliable source.
They're wrong that they rate the Guardian and Breitbart the same. First of all, they don't have the same credibility rating. You also have to ignore the reports to reach that conclusion. Breitbart is a "Questionable Source."
A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no sourcing to credible information, a complete lack of transparency, and/or is fake news. Fake News is the deliberate attempt to publish hoaxes and/or disinformation for profit or influence. Sources listed in the Questionable Category may be very untrustworthy and should be fact-checked on a per-article basis. Sources on this list are not considered fake news unless specifically written in the reasoning section for that source.
Reasoning: Extreme Right, Propaganda, Conspiracy, Failed Fact Checks
The Guardian are not listed as a Questionable Source. They've linked to sources that have failed fact checks and failed numerous fact checks (mostly in Op-Ed), though 4 have recently dropped off the list in the last month or so (I think). Their fact-checking seems to have improved. They say this about them:
The Guardian holds a left-leaning editorial bias and sometimes relies on sources that have failed fact checks. Further, while The Guardian has failed several fact checks, they also produce an incredible amount of content; therefore, most stories are accurate, but the reader must beware, and hence why we assign them a Mixed rating for factual reporting.
'Be aware that they publish an avalanche of great news but have failed a few fact checks' is not nearly the same thing as 'Questionable source that publishes propaganda and conspiracy theories! You must fact-check each article individually because they're so unreliable.' There's no way you could read those pages and conclude those sources are the same. They say that Breitbart is clearly a much more biased and less reliable source (to borrow a phrase).