Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In 2015, the project also began systematically reviewing health care news releases written by public relations professionals. By 2018, the editorial team had reviewed more than 500 such PR news releases to go along with more than 2,500 reviews of news stories.
Sokal in 2011. In an interview on the U.S. radio program All Things Considered, Sokal said he was inspired to submit the bogus article after reading Higher Superstition (1994), in which authors Paul R. Gross and Norman Levitt claim that some humanities journals will publish anything as long as it has "the proper leftist thought" and quoted (or was written by) well-known leftist thinkers.
The Signpost has identified an extensive scam perpetrated by a company that calls itself "Elite Wiki Writers" or "Wiki Moderator", among many other names.Some of the other names they are suspected of using include wikicuratorz.com, wikiscribes.com, wikimastery.com, and wikimediafoundetion.com.
If you get an email providing you a PIN number and an 800 or 888 number to call, this a scam to try and steal valuable personal info. These emails will often ask you to call AOL at the number provided, provide the PIN number and will ask for account details including your password.
GLAD was originally called the Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders.It was founded by John Ward in 1978, [3] in response to a sting operation conducted by Boston police that resulted in the arrest of more than a hundred men in the men's rooms of the main building of the Boston Public Library. [4]
For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways to reach us
Hindenburg Research LLC was a U.S. investment research firm with a focus on activist short-selling founded by Nathan Anderson in 2017. [2] [3] [4] Named after the 1937 Hindenburg disaster, which they characterize as a human-made avoidable disaster, [5] the firm generated public reports via its website that allege corporate fraud and malfeasance. [6]
In September 2009, before the investigations revealed the selective and heavy editing of the videos, Alexandra Fenwick of the Columbia Journalism Review accused the video ensemble of being a politically motivated piece that lacked context and did not present accurate information. She characterized the work as raw information instead of journalism.