Is Tank Archives biased?

[Michael Kenny]

Whether people are biased or not matters very much, a lot of people use the internet for research and if said internet is polluted with biased and untrustworthy sources you end up with biased untrustworthy nonsense being spread around.

This is no different from pre-internet book publishing. I reckon over 80% of all WW2 books are worthless as references. I think it a case of read 10 books and write no 11. Its always been that way and some of the good and the great who were publishing when I was young I now see as absolute amateurs who knew very little about what they chronicled.
For sure it has got much worse in the current 'absolute free speech' world where the idiotic 'my opinion is just as valid as yours' wail of the terminally stupid entwines with the social media desire for engagement above everything else. Clicks are everything and 1000 clicks from morons are considered just as valuable as 1000 clicks from sane people. Now days most internet content is aimed at captive audiences who have a particular outlook and the sites conform absolutely to what the customer wants. Fact and accuracy have no place in that world.
Just recently a link was posted here at AHF to an easily proven (to the 1% who check) forged WW2 Tiger crewman Diary which was exposed as a fake 20 years ago. Despite this it has gained 150k views in 11 days and the comments are 99.9% praise for posting such a 'wonderful' German account of WW2.
The internet is sadly(in my opinion) polluted beyond all redemption. The chaff is 90% of content.

[Westphalia1812]

I don't know what all this squabble about bias is about. You go there, you look at the sources and if it seems reliable you take it, if not then leave it...

Whether people are biased or not matters very much, a lot of people use the internet for research and if said internet is polluted with biased and untrustworthy sources you end up with biased untrustworthy nonsense being spread around.

Then start your own blog and correct his comments...This discussion here won't change anything

[ThatZenoGuy]

Then start your own blog and correct his comments...This discussion here won't change anything

If this discussion won't change anything, why are you so concerned about it? Start your own forum and rant about people discussing bias there, this discussion won't change anything.

[Michael Kenny]

If this discussion won't change anything, why are you so concerned about it? Start your own forum and rant about people discussing bias there, this discussion won't change anything.

Perhaps he (mistakenly) believed it was a real search for 'facts' rather than a 'just get rid of the facts we don't like to hear' complaint?

[Alanmccoubrey]

What is this doing in this section of the Forum ?

To be clear, 'The Chieftain' is a part of WWII History by his employment. It is MY opinion that his extensive modern experience, while useful in some cases, is not applicable in many cases. And having him, interview a troll like TA-Guy, kind of turns me off. I can just say, they believe in what they think they are saying is 'true', but it is not just my opinion that TA-Guy has an agenda. Opinions are allowed on this forum i believe.

And in your opinion can you tell me what this is doing on a WW2 , factually based area like this ? And there really is no need to be quite so aggressive in your attitude towards one who is only asking a question or is it only you who are allowed an opinion/voice ?
Don't bother to answer because I sure as heck won't be reading anything else you have to say.

[ThatZenoGuy]

And in your opinion can you tell me what this is doing on a WW2 , factually based area like this ? And there really is no need to be quite so aggressive in your attitude towards one who is only asking a question or is it only you who are allowed an opinion/voice ?
Don't bother to answer because I sure as heck won't be reading anything else you have to say.

We're discussing WW2 historians having bias about tanks in the WW2 tanks section, seems pretty reasonable to me. Why do you have a problem with that?
Don't bother to answer because I sure as heck won't be reading anything else you have to say.

[Yoozername]

I don't know what all this squabble about bias is about. You go there, you look at the sources and if it seems reliable you take it, if not then leave it...

Yes. Exactly. And most of my posts involve primary sources.

And, I am not saying I am right all the time. I have even posted 'Anti-Tiger' posts at times.

[Yoozername]

If this discussion won't change anything, why are you so concerned about it? Start your own forum and rant about people discussing bias there, this discussion won't change anything.

Perhaps he (mistakenly) believed it was a real search for 'facts' rather than a 'just get rid of the facts we don't like to hear' complaint?

LOL!!!!! Thanks. Too Funny (coming from you). Bless your heart.

[Westphalia1812]

I don't know what all this squabble about bias is about. You go there, you look at the sources and if it seems reliable you take it, if not then leave it...

Yes. Exactly. And most of my posts involve primary sources.

Very good. Have you thought about publishing your work?

[Erik1]

If this discussion won't change anything, why are you so concerned about it? Start your own forum and rant about people discussing bias there, this discussion won't change anything.

Perhaps he (mistakenly) believed it was a real search for 'facts' rather than a 'just get rid of the facts we don't like to hear' complaint?

LOL!!!!! Thanks. Too Funny (coming from you). Bless your heart.

Since Westphalia asked if you wanted to publish, does that mean that you search for new/rarely seen sources of information, and not just information in books?