14,150 total conversations in 684 threads
Last posted
Aug 18, 2015 at 06:25PM EDT.
Added
Aug 18, 2015 at 02:05PM EDT
7 posts
from
7 users
Pretty self-explanatory. I generally think news like Reuters and The Independent are the most unbiased while stuff like Fox News and MSNBC are more biased. Those are just my choices though, what are your most trusted/reliable choices for news and why? Please also say what news sources you think are biased or unreliable. Cheers, KYM. :D
The most objective news source you could probably find in the USA would be the National Public Radio. Any debate or controversial news will get an equal amount of time on the issue.
Another news source that is relatively objective on American news would be BBC seeing as its not American it removes all chance of trying to sugarcoat news in America (or at least I'd think).
All MSM news sources are exactly the same. Reuters/AP is where the MSM gets their news from, which they regurgitate to you with editorial opinions added, which is where the difference comes from. Very occasionally do they do independent investigations into bigger issues anymore. Everything is copy and pasted from AP with a few quotes from official sources that you could call and get yourself.
Nobody has personal sources anymore, and it's due to a lot of the comments I see around forums like here on KYM: "Do you have a real source?" The public has been trained to only accept named government/corporate officials reading from their official statements. That's not investigative journalism, but the public no longer sees any reason to trust investigative journalism, hence the practice is all but dead. Our MSM parallels North Korea's, and for some reason people think that's a good thing.
I don't know if you could call it displaying news, but Fact Check enjoys actual reported facts and compares them to the tripe politicians claim. So on one facet, you're taking real world events and comparing/contrasting with facts.
If that doesn't work, I always use Reuters. Someone else already posted that detail.
lisalombs wrote:
All MSM news sources are exactly the same. Reuters/AP is where the MSM gets their news from, which they regurgitate to you with editorial opinions added, which is where the difference comes from. Very occasionally do they do independent investigations into bigger issues anymore. Everything is copy and pasted from AP with a few quotes from official sources that you could call and get yourself.
Nobody has personal sources anymore, and it's due to a lot of the comments I see around forums like here on KYM: "Do you have a real source?" The public has been trained to only accept named government/corporate officials reading from their official statements. That's not investigative journalism, but the public no longer sees any reason to trust investigative journalism, hence the practice is all but dead. Our MSM parallels North Korea's, and for some reason people think that's a good thing.
Well, there's… something we agree on.
Ap and Reuters are good.
Most biased are the ones with nothing to lose, and so give 0 fucks about their bias. Sites like Salon.com, Info Wars, Buzzfeed, those kinds of sites.
I will believe anything that comes out of CBC and CTV and I think there was another one CNN I think. But I don't ever go to fox news. I don't know how anyone can trust that news network after watching videos like this.
I mean number 4 and especially number 5…
"Take it up with the national institute of health"
"Look I am a counselor member on the national institute of health your number is wrong".
Too achieve that level of rekt I even felt embarrassed for Billy O'Reilly.
Already a memeber? | Don't have an account? |