The Canary has been debanked by Lloyds. Despite banking with them for almost a decade they are currently withholding a substantial amount of our money. We are left with barely any funds.
We do know that multiple other politically engaged people have suffered similar actions by other banks in recent times. It is not lost on us that powerful banks are able to restrict the financial activity of anti-Zionist and pro-Palestine organisations and individuals. Whilst we do not currently know the reasons behind our debanking, we cannot afford to be naive about this.
It is an outrage that the Canary has been unceremoniously dropped into financial instability with no notice or explanation from Lloyds.
Strong left bias, but “mostly factual” rating from mbfc
MBFC is almost entirely created by one person (6 named on site, but 1 is by far the controlling authority).
Nobody is without bias, but a large organisation of many varying views can temper it to a tolerable amount. To say that a near one man operation can act without bias though is ridiculous.
To rely on MBFC to determine the credibility of a news source is like outsourcing your critical thinking to somebody else. They’re a hack organisation as much as the organisations they claim to call out.
Mbfc also calls hasbara rags like Times of Israel “left leaning and mostly factual”.
Guess that’s middle of the lane for most people then.
Nah, it has been quite dishonest at times
I was referring to the ‘strong left bias’ and MBFC’s own right slant.
The Canary very much has a strong left bias
There’s nothing wrong with having a left wing bias or being left wing, it’s a bit silly to try and act as if having opinions is a bad thing
I’m not familiar with them. I’m not making any comment about the Canary, only MBFC.
Yeah. You know the difference between ‘mostly’ and ‘always’ does allow for some ‘at times’ exceptions, eight?
Yes
The Canary, while it doesn’t outright lie, creates strange theories and interpretations surrounding things. It’s definitely left biased.