SPLC has had a tough time in court. they already paid out millions for defamation, and were stuck arguing that their listings are only opinions not facts.
meanwhile, they pay wikipedia to still be on the "list of reliable sources", because if someone is posting opinions so controversial that they get sued over them, while paying out millions in damages for lying about others to cause reputational damage, then they're definitionally NOT a reliable source.
anyone who spoke out against the grift.
SPLC has had a tough time in court. they already paid out millions for defamation, and were stuck arguing that their listings are only opinions not facts.
meanwhile, they pay wikipedia to still be on the "list of reliable sources", because if someone is posting opinions so controversial that they get sued over them, while paying out millions in damages for lying about others to cause reputational damage, then they're definitionally NOT a reliable source.
Oh how far they've fallen. They won't get their good name back. Rebranding isn't going to work.
Get it back?