Can we add Superstation95 to Hoax?

The majority of their 'news stories' are completely made up. They do post sports scores that seem correct. But EVERYTHING ELSE is made up. Members come across this site, think the article is real and one got to the top of the ATS front page, I see.

a reply to: reldra

Which one got to the top of ATS ?

originally posted by: Alien Abduct
a reply to: reldra

Which one got to the top of ATS ?

You can't just click ATS in the upper left?

Hoax article Superstation95

makes ATS look amateurish.


I have complained about superstation95 about 15 times.

a reply to: reldra

Their Facebook page has only 400 likes and three strangely worded reviews. Seems pretty fishy.

originally posted by: Joecanada11
a reply to: reldra

Their Facebook page has only 400 likes and three strangely worded reviews. Seems pretty fishy.

It has alwas been a hoax site. I am hoping ATS adds it to a list that can;t be used.

a reply to: reldra

Did you read the actual article? It says this at the end of it.

It is not our intent to cause panic or alarm and while we expect readers to be intelligent enough to discern this on their own, we feel compelled to point out that these could simply be paranoid ramblings of an insane person who killed himself. On the other hand, these could also be revelations by a person who was so distraught over the ugly truth, that he killed himself. We at SuperStation95 just don't know.

I've never really looked into superstation95 before this, but after a quick glance at their homepage, I don't see why you claim it's a hoax site.

Just reading the page will convince most it's pure click-bait nonsense. It's a Hal Turner sock-puppet.

I agree with reldra--it should be added to the Hoax list.

a reply to: reldra

There was a thread yesterday citing superstation95 (since removed) about the hidden quadrillions of dollars, which took me a few minutes to prove as an obvious hoax.

Maybe they're not 100% hoax and have some actually legitimate reporting? I know I've run into several fake stories of theirs via ATS threads. I haven't checked them out myself to see how much of it is bunk and how much is just "we'll report everything we hear, even if we hear it from garbage sources."

I definitely agree they should be looked at for blanket 86'ing though if their stories are just going to be a collection of debunking material. That said, maybe it's better the stories are here to be debunked.

I'm with you. Ban this site. What a crock.

Please post the hoax article's they post.

Deny ignorance and all, you know...

a reply to: Vector99

www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: Phage

That linked me to an ATS thread.

A direct link would be preferred.

I'm still having trouble getting past the fact that they claim to be a radio station in NY at 95.1 and there is no such station.

Not to mention that "Superstation" was a term used back in the day for stations that were "local" but broadcast throughout the country for example TBS out of Atlanta and WGN out of Chicago. Maybe I'm showing my age there, but the name makes no sense.

a reply to: Djarums

Here is the thing I don't get:

If ATS is going to decide on what is fake and what is not, doesn't ATS run the risk of becoming the censor? I think it surely does, but I am a bit lost with this culture of censorship on ATS ATM.

Maybe I am alone, but even the Enquirer gets a story right. I don't think this should be banned outright. ATS is good at debunking individual claims/articles. Deny ignorance is our theme! Why deny an outlet that is attempting to reveal truth as they see it. That seems like hypocracy. They admit on their own articles, they received such info, but leave it to the reader to further investigate.

If you start banning sites you disagree with, we might as well just give up on denying ignorance and seeking out truth!

a reply to: CynConcepts

It seems that the whole idea of debunking is being replaced by the idea of "ban".

I hope not though.

a reply to: reldra

every tail has to be addressed on its individual merits // demerits - ` cookie cutter ` bans on a source just provoke claims of cencorship and encourage marytr-doom