Category: News and Views
Where do you get your news? When it comes to national news, I try to get my news from outlets that are not dependent on corporate money. Naturally, if you are dependent on corporate dollars, you are not going to go against their interests. That's probably why on main stream networks, you don't usually hear discussions of things like universal healthcare. That would go against the interests of the "health insurance" giants that advertise on those networks. Examples of media that is not dependent on corporations are:
Free Speech TV web site http://freespeech.org
Democracy Now web site http://democracynow.org
The Real News web site http://therealnews.com
FireDogLake http://firedoglake.com
What about you? Do you depend on the main stream cable networks for your news?
I've heard Al Jazira (sorry, I'm not actually sure how to spell it) is really good for "trustworthy" news. But I have nothing to back that up. You really have to be careful with news outlets for the reasons already stated, but also because the facts might not be what the news outlets are telling you. Fox, for instance is notorious for delivering ... inaccurate news.
I think the idea of depending or relying on news from any particular source is a little outdated today. With so much available information, I sort, filter and receive news from a wide variety of formal and informal sources including TV news networks, local and national news websites including my local incredibly popular CBS affiliate and the Associated Press, friends, a variety of random Twitter feeds, talkshow hosts, the occasional newspaper and random Google news searches. Keep in mind that corporate influence is not the only source of bias in news today.
1 word.
Internet.
Just like you wouldn't go to a mechanic to fix your sore throat, or a doctor to fix the electrical wiring in your house, you should also go to only credible expert sources for the component you're interested in.
Reading industry-based publications for economics, international affairs and other current event areas will give you a more accurate picture of what's going on than will any actual news outlet.
A news anchor or a talk show host or a talking head / commentator are all experts in one thing: blab. Political bloggers and magazine editors are experts in one thing: expostulating on their particular political persuasion.
So if you want to know what the republicans are thinking, read National Review. If you want to know what they are feeling, watch or listen to a commentator on Fox News or a talk radio show host.
However, if what you want is to know what is actually going on in a particular area, read those publications and by and large skip the editorial sections. Editorial writers are experts in debate and expressing their opinion. That's not the same as reading about how a given system works.
So for your personal economic outlook you may read the Economist or similar publications. For publicly traded companies and trends, you may read the non-editorial sections of the Wall Street Journal. It's called the Wall Street Journal, but it in fact will cover international ventures and other exchanges on non-U.S. fronts as well.
Then there are the demographic-based content, like I recently subscribed to Mens' Journal, which has info for guys 30s and up mainly.
In short, always source the material: what gives this person the qualification to say what they have just said? This vantage-point rubs a lot of people the wrong way because they desperately want to have a finite answer and a priestly source for all their information.
The days of priests and witch doctors are over. We have access to unparalleled information, so now we are individually responsible, to paleolithic proportions.
It's also trendy and popular, and "makes you look smart", to be up on every single issue every single day. I don't think so, though of course when I was younger I would try (many times being wildly wrong in my conclusions). I tend to opt for quality over quantity.
Remember the media business is largely unregulated, and wholly unregulated on Twitter. They can say anything they want, about anyone they want, make themselves look objective, etc. But to our shame as the American public, few of us ask the hard question: What qualifies this person to make this statement? Freedom of speech definitely does not mean freedom from stupidity. And stupidity defined is people expostulating as experts / demanding followers who have no qualification to do so.
i like using google news alerts, because you can follow any topic you want and get results from all diffrent websites
i also like using the BBC, and sky news
Here's a list:
PopURLs (news/blog summary site)
Al Jazeera
Google News
Reuters
BBC
Vice TV (VBS)
Current TV
In Australia, some of the TV Networks has reliable sources for News Overseas, such as the SBS World News and Fox News. We also have the Sky News Channel.
As for the News online which I prefer, we obviously have Newspapers online, Twitter and Facebook as well.
I alos have a friend who is a Newsreader for one of our TV Networks, so I sometimes get breaking news off of him.
I usually read the local news here on my i pod touch.
it is arizona news.
whatever I could find and stuff.
and, oh, what you guys called biased on fox is called news talk not news. and duh, of course it's bias it's social commentary on the news. not news itself.
Every news channel has a bias. Fox is more conservative while CNN and MSNBC are very liberal.
Since I am conservative in my values, I get most of my news from:
wnd.com, cnsnews.com, royters, etc. There's also a site called infowars.com which many consider conspiracy. I don't know about some of what they post as it's pretty scary stuff. However, I do check it on ocasion just to see what they have to say. Also, Michaelsavage.com is another site I sometimes visit.
I quit watching CBS, NBC, ABC, etc years ago.
I also listen to talk radio, The Mark Levin show to be exact.
haha, levin is good, so is beck and boortz, and hanity isn't bad either, for talk shows, no one says to take them like the news, and if you do, then seriously, get serious! but yeah, by the right standards there stuff and opinion is pretty damn good, I really need to listen to levin more carefully. and stuff. I like fox though for there opinion shows not news haha! great at talk shows and it was nice holding the gop debates and stuff.
I love Levin. I've read 2 of his books and found them very informative.
I sometimes listen to Alex Jones and check his site
infowars.com for news that alot of the cable news channels don't take seriously. For court and trial news It's HLN i mean unofficially court TV for that type of news. I have listened to Al Jazeera before and i think they do a good job. Again i wish people in the US took them more seriously for news. It will be interesting to see how they get cable coverage for Al Jazeera America the new news channel they are starting up now from buying Current TV. For local Arizona news i watch my local tv news like ABC15 or CBS5 news. I don't really listen to talk radio because i feel they just do alot of arguing and blaming the other side for the problems in the country. That does not interest me.
Here's my list.
Aljazeera English
The BBC World Service
Sky News
Google News just to see what the Msm is covering
Sometimes Infowars and Prison Planet
In Spanish, El País andSpain's equivalent to Npr. I sometimes listen and read Npr too.
Liz
I get most of my information from the daily newspaper listening over a radio reading service. I also listen to BBC, NPR. I watch MSNBC and then watch Fox to see the difference each reports. That can be really interesting. I avoid the sites named in the first post as they are not any more reliable than the big players. Small doesn't mean accurate or balanced. In general major new aggrigators will be more accurate than the so-called alternative press. So much that masquerades as new is really thinly disguised opinion.
From Norbert The News Nerd.
Aljazeera English
The BBC World Service
, and sometimes infowars if I find something of their's on youtube.
I wouldn't say that infowar/prison planet is all that reliable. While they may
sometimes have something of value, Its mostly conspiracy. their business
Model is getting people scared enough to buy survival products from their
preparedness store. Nothing moves sails like predictions of end times.
I think all news sources have a slant. Its really a question of how vast the slant
is regarding a particular story. While you're taking information in, Try thinking
about who is publishing the info. what are they trying to say. Why do they want
you thinking the way they'd like you to think. And last but not least. How are
they making their money?