tyler的奶奶说她们全家都是MAGA，包括tyler

[YouHi]

这就尴尬了。
原来是友军误伤。
误会了误会了。

[YouHi]

他奶奶肯定是白左，是 trans。如果不是，肯定是左煤造谣。

--- 黄床

车轱辘话就这么几句话。

脑细胞不多呗。

[VladPutin]

左B理屈词穷就只能造谣了，daily beast是个什么野鸡网站

daily beast就是大名鼎鼎的news week，现在的news week反倒是假货。

[YouHi]

daily beast就是大名鼎鼎的news week，现在的news week反倒是假货。

LOL这个牠怎么知道。太难了。

[CellcycleBat]

我的问题是daily beast是否是主流媒体?
Google AI回答： 这很复杂，但总的来说，《每日野兽》并不被认为是传统的主流新闻来源。它的名声是一份咄咄逼人、固执己见的网络小报，带有左翼倾向。虽然它做过一些有影响力的调查报道，但其“高低”的新闻方式，将严肃的新闻报道与流行文化八卦融合在一起，使其有别于更传统的媒体。

[foxbat]

大家看看daily beast是个什么鸡脖媒体

Credibility for The Daily Beast is complex, with assessments varying based on its mix of journalism and opinion and its left-leaning bias. While it has produced notable investigative journalism and received awards, it has also faced public criticism and accusations of errors.
Areas of strength
Original reporting: The site has been known for aggressive reporting on topics like politics and national security, with some reports having a significant impact. Examples include breaking news related to sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein and stories about Republican Herschel Walker.
Editorial standards: The Daily Beast has a publicly available code of ethics that outlines commitments to accuracy, fairness, and independence. This includes guidelines for using anonymous sources, avoiding conflicts of interest, and issuing corrections transparently.
Journalistic awards: The publication has won multiple awards for journalism, including Webby Awards for Best News Site in 2012 and 2013.
Areas of concern
Editorial tone and bias: While the site describes itself as "non-partisan but not neutral," some critics and media watchdogs, such as AllSides, have classified it as left-biased or "far left". The publication features a mix of news and opinion, and some readers find its tone "snarky" or excessively partisan.
Tabloid journalism approach: Past editor-in-chief Noah Shachtman characterized the site as a "high-end tabloid" that embraces "gonzo journalism". This style can prioritize punchy, aggressive storytelling, which some see as less serious journalism.
Past ethical issues: The Daily Beast has faced significant public issues in the past, including:
Plagiarism: In 2010, the site fired an investigative reporter who was found to have plagiarized content from other outlets.
Highly criticized articles: A 2016 article about gay dating apps during the Rio Olympics drew intense condemnation from journalism ethics experts and LGBTQ+ advocates for being "unethical" and "dangerous." The article was removed and the site issued an apology.
Doxing accusations: In 2019, a reporter was accused of doxing an anonymous social media user who posted a manipulated video of a politician. The reporter revealed the user's identity, drawing criticism from other journalists.
Recent leadership conflicts: A 2024 New York Times report described internal tensions and resignations following a new management takeover. Staffers reported dissatisfaction with the new leaders' editorial direction and management style.
Conclusion
Ultimately, readers should approach The Daily Beast with an awareness of its strong progressive point of view. Its news reporting has produced solid, award-winning journalism but has also, in the past, been marked by significant ethical lapses. To get a balanced perspective, it is best to read The Daily Beast in conjunction with other sources across the political spectrum.

[justChat]

在left-right光谱上，在整个人群的视角，这两人真可能是友军。
但不算误伤。
咳咳是far-right，非常far，意味着非常多极端的观点，必然容易引起极端情绪。
而且这些人的一个问题就是，只有观点，没有任何fact，reason或logic可言。（参见被刺杀前最后一句话）

泰勒可能对反感其中一两个观点。

这就尴尬了。
原来是友军误伤。
误会了误会了。