Skip to content

Hi, please share your suggestions, we are listening

← Yahoo Homepage

try not to be so obviously biased to the left

try reporting new fairly. move to the middle, not FAR FAR FAR FAR FAR LEFT.

1st ranked

We're glad you're here

Please sign in to leave feedback
Signed in as (Sign out)
Close
Close

We’ll send you updates on this idea

L E shared this idea  ·   ·  Report…  ·  Admin →
Comments are closed An error occurred while saving the comment
  • Chad Cardinal commented  ·   ·  Report

    Why doesn't your company take a neutral approach to news, which is what the media is supposed to do, put the information out and let the public make their own decision. Your job is to report the news and not put any kind of spin on the information.
    The media was put in place to keep the government on check but what you all as a group are doing now is a shame to your profession.

  • Buck Wheat commented  ·   ·  Report

    A pandemic can not be racist. Let's start with that. If black people are more susceptible to covid-19, it is their own fault, not the fault of anyone else. Lifestyle and poor choices to congregate in mass do not add up to racism, it adds up to Stupidity, and we know they have that corner marketed. Stop protecting stupid people and call it like it really is. And while we’re on it, why do the Police show up? Because some A-hole is committing a crime. Blacks commit 65+% of al violent crime, while they are 13% of the population. Message to blacks, fix your crime rate, or more violence is coming your way. Write something about that truth, Yahoo. Stop coddling blacks, they’ve got enough free stuff. Time to earn it.

  • [Deleted User] commented  ·   ·  Report

    You communist White hating BS has gotten people killed!!!!! Henry Ford was right about your kind!!!

  • Timothy Hess commented  ·   ·  Report

    When will Yahoo dump the bimbos at the top that think their liberal views will be accepted! Shoot the first tree in their feet, and the rest will just limp away! ********!

  • Chris G Gilmore commented  ·   ·  Report

    So many Yahoo stories are essentially. . .non-stories. There is no meat to them. Nothing relevant is learned or explained in further detail that offers any insight beyond what the headline provides.

    Take Stephen Proctor's recent article on Mike Lindell appearing on Jimmy Kimmel. The headline tells us viewers were riled up by Lindell's appearance on the show. The article reasserts viewers from both sides of the political spectrum were angered that Lindell appeared on the show. He went on anyway. He and Jimmy talked. That's it. Sure, there were some filler words to expand the content and make it look like an article, but it wasn't anything that we couldn't have gleaned from the headline alone.

    I realize you need a constant flow of content, but the content should have some actual content to it, something more than an expanded headline.

    If I'm going to take the time to read a Yahoo article, it should have something worth reading contained within it.

  • Robert Lombardi commented  ·   ·  Report

    Take your "temporary" block on replies off,let's get the truth out there,not just your biased take on issues!!!!!

  • Roger Gauthier commented  ·   ·  Report

    Provide positives for each side so there is a conversation. It cannot be all one way. Remember the are people who wear masks outside. There are also people who just don't care. If someone shot a elephant who cares who they are. If you do show all people who have shot elephants. Give truth to both sides and yahoo will blow up and be more successful than the rest. Most yahoo headlines sound like 15 yr. old adultescents wrote them after watching TMZ.

  • Irene commented  ·   ·  Report

    Dylan Stableford is no legal expert so, when Chauvin's trial verdict is guaranteed to cause riots, why do you have an article where he describes 2nd degree murder as requiring proof that "Chauvin caused Floyd's death while assaulting him"? That's the end of his definition! Then Stableford ends his article with "None of the charges requires prosecutors to prove Chauvin intended to kill Floyd".

    Well, here's Justia's definition of 2nd degree murder: "Second-degree murder is defined as an INTENTIONAL killing that was not premeditated".

    It's MURDER. It might not require premeditation, but it most definitely requires INTENT! Only manslaughter is unintentional. Murder also requires proof of MALICE. Chauvin is required to have intended to act in a manner so reckless that he knows it will likely kill somebody, and knows that it is outside the scope of his job duties. He can't have been acting within the scope of his duties and be charged with MURDER! Cops kill criminals all the time (and vice versa)! That's like charging soldiers with murder for killing on the battlefield. Please don't have Dylan play big boy legal analyst anymore, while people's lives and businesses are at stake. He never does sufficient research for stuff like that. I wish somebody would hold Yahoo liable for all of the crime and murder your sloppy misreporting causes. And, of course, no comment section so people might correct Dylan's faulty legal definitions.

  • Don commented  ·   ·  Report

    I block the lying con artists from the fake news site Fox News EVERYDAY..... but their blatant BS articles full of anti-American horses**t keep showing up EVERYDAY. Which tells me that you don't actually block anything, do you? What would it take for you to actually do what you say you'll do?

  • Irene commented  ·   ·  Report

    Today, there was an article titled "Am I a Fetish or the Prettiest Girl In The Room? Why Attractive Black Women trigger White People" The article claimed that the painting "A Pair of Broad Bottoms" had been made to objectify black women, resulting in the expectation that black women have large bottoms and twerk. When I pointed out that the two people in the painting were actual people at the time (Sarah Baartman and Lord Grenville), who looked the way the painting had depicted, the moderator kept removing my comment. Apparently, he can't be bothered to do a google search before determining if my comment is factual enough to be posted.

    The same is true for a later comment I tried to give explaining that only a small fraction of white Americans descend from ***** owners. This is a fact that has been attested to by several experts, including Nell Irvine Painter, an African American black studies professor and historian at Princeton University, in her book "The History of White People". Even snopes tries to exaggerate the percentage by pointing out that Adam Rothman, a historian at Georgetown University, claims 7.4% of white Americans owned slaves. Well, that's still a small fraction. Snopes takes issue because this number includes non-*****-holding states, but my comment never claimed to be only about *****-holding states and, further, ***** ownership came nowhere close to the majority of white households even in the South. Some states were worse than others, but I didn't specify I was discussing any specific state. Rather, I clarified I'm discussing white Americans today, the majority of whom, as I said, "do not descend from *****-owners". As widely known as this fact is, when I tried to post it, the Yahoo moderator blocked me from making any more comments and threatened to remove my yahoo account. Am I supposed to lie and claim the bulk of white Americans DO descend from ***** owners? Because your "terms and conditions" claim we're not supposed to lie in the comments section. If we are only allowed to post "facts", how come both your articles and the comments section are filled with leftist inaccuracies that we will have our Yahoo accounts removed for trying to correct?

  • Irene commented  ·   ·  Report

    Today, there was an article titled "Am I a Fetish or the Prettiest Girl In The Room? Why Attractive Black Women trigger White People" The article claimed that the painting "A Pair of Broad Bottoms" had been made to objectify black women, resulting in the expectation that black women have large bottoms and twerk. When I pointed out that the two people in the painting were actual people at the time (Sarah Baartman and Lord Grenville), who looked the way the painting had depicted, the moderator kept removing my comment. Apparently, he can't be bothered to do a google search before determining if my comment is factual enough to be posted.

    The same is true for a later comment I tried to give explaining that only a small fraction of white Americans descend from ***** owners. This is a fact that has been attested to by several experts, including Nell Irvine Painter, an African American black studies professor and historian at Princeton University, in her book "The History of White People". Even snopes tries to exaggerate the percentage by pointing out that Adam Rothman, a historian at Georgetown University, claims 7.4% of white Americans owned slaves. Well, that's still a small fraction. Snopes takes issue because this number includes non-*****-holding states, but my comment never claimed to be only about *****-holding states and, further, ***** ownership came nowhere close to the majority of white households even in the South. Some states were worse than others, but I didn't specify I was discussing any specific state. Rather, I clarified I'm discussing white Americans today, the majority of whom, as I said, "do not descend from *****-owners". As widely known as this fact is, when I tried to post it, the Yahoo moderator blocked me from making any more comments and threatened to remove my yahoo account. Am I supposed to lie and claim the bulk of white Americans DO descend from ***** owners? Because your "terms and conditions" claim we're not supposed to lie in the comments section. If we are only allowed to post "facts", how come both your articles and the comments section are filled with leftist inaccuracies that we will have our Yahoo accounts removed for trying to correct?

  • Irene commented  ·   ·  Report

    Ever since the Capitol riot, Yahoo has brought us photos and videos focused on each individual involved, claimed we need to remove free speech from the internet, and encouraged family members to turn eachother in: none of which Yahoo did during the much deadlier BLM riots over the summer. Yahoo gives us all of the info: name, occupation, history, etc. of each and every person there, but they didn't think we needed any such coverage regarding looters and arsonists in BLM. Today, they brought us this ridiculous video analyzing the "hate symbols" worn in the Capitol riots: "This guy made an 'OK' hand signal, this guy appears to be wearing a Bugs Bunny tattoo, lots of people wearing yellow", sort of thing. "We're not sure if the protestors understand the significance of their hand signals, tattoos, or colors" yada yada. Yahoo's bias has always been rather maddening when they aren't busy being laughable.

  • Irene commented  ·   ·  Report

    I know you posted this 4 years ago, and all they've done since is remove the comments section so they can misquote Trump and we can't call them out anymore. Today, Ben Werschkul, who is apparently Yahoo's Senior Producer and Writer at Yahoo Finance, claimed Trump had called Mexican immigrants "rapists". In reality, what Trump said was "I speak with border guards, and they tell me what we are getting. Some are criminals, some are rapists and some, I assume, are good people, but we aren't getting Mexico's best and brightest". In other words, Trump clarified that he is quoting border guards regarding which Mexicans are coming here ILLEGALLY (border guards don't deal with legal immigration), and that some of those (surprise, surprise) are criminals, so we do better to stick with LEGAL immigration in order to get Mexico's best and brightest. Naturally, though, Yahoo has removed our ability to correct their misquote on their site, so I am left no choice but to do it here instead. They've forced us into their echo chamber and then they wonder why their audience is leaving.

  • SHEA SIMPSON commented  ·   ·  Report

    I have been an avid Yahoo news follower for many years BUT as of lately (Trump's Presidential term), Yahoo has become completely one-sided. I thought news media outlets were to stay biased and just print factual news, but not Yahoo. Yahoo prints here-say stories and then later when facts come out, you do not print any type of retraction. Media has divided our country politically, racially and culturally. Shame on you!

1 2 … 20 22 24 … 29 30

Yahoo Homepage: Customer Support

Categories

Feedback and Knowledge Base

(thinking…)