Mens Tennis Forums banner

1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,733 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
So on this forum there seems to be a lot on conjecture around what source of news media exhibits unbais in certain situations, or at the very least is less bad than others. I would like to know your opinion of the best and worst forms of news media, not with regard to quality of show or output (though they are largely synonymous) but their validity and achievement of a unbais within their coverage

For example Poster A says best is Fox for a unbiased view of the news and worst is the Guardian etc

If anyone has good news sites or more obscure blogs that they find good, and are lesser known, please post them here too
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
139 Posts
Each news source has its agenda. This also includes the 'alternative' and independent media which is just as conspicuous in their partiality. The best way to become informed and educated about something is to read as much as possible from as many diverse sources as possible. After a while, you will begin putting the pieces together by understanding what is a fabrication and downright hyperbolic and what is true and genuine. Each source has a degree of truth, and each source has a degree of arrant fallacy. The key is dissecting as much information as possible and then coming up with your own rational, substantive and logical conclusion. I feel sorry for those who confine their readings strictly to one source or a monopoly of sources that essentially has the same agenda and bias. You are only getting one small side of the story.

In saying that, I like to follow the website www.realclearnews.com - it may have a small bias, but it essentially collects a bunch of articles and other pertinent information from a vast range of different news sources all across the web. It is a good way to get the alternative and mainstream viewpoints on current affairs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,477 Posts
i do a mash up from BBC, CNN, dir.bg, manager.bg magazine, le monde and TF1, depending on the news.

And still i don't rush to assume what overlaps is sheer fact.

These days are harder to get information, than even the early 1900...

coz 1. Too much info and 2. always, for sure, always biased.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,624 Posts
So on this forum there seems to be a lot on conjecture around what source of news media exhibits unbais in certain situations, or at the very least is less bad than others. I would like to know your opinion of the best and worst forms of news media, not with regard to quality of show or output (though they are largely synonymous) but their validity and achievement of a unbais within their coverage

For example Poster A says best is Fox for a unbiased view of the news and worst is the Guardian etc

If anyone has good news sites or more obscure blogs that they find good, and are lesser known, please post them here too
Anyone who thinks Fox is anything other than a crazy, right-wing, propaganda machine needs to seek medical help immediately.

The best news source, by a long way is The Guardian. Some people may find it leans a bit too much to the left but it one of the few organisations with the balls to stand up to the UK and US governments when they are in the wrong. It made a lot of enemies when it fought to bring the phone hacking scandal to light in the UK but that should have been put to one side when the freedom of the press was under attack. Watching the other news organisation stand back while The Guardian was attacked by government talking heads during the Snowden affair, with some of them even joining the attacks, shows how pathetic and spineless they all are.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,857 Posts
Sure, the Guardian is a great source, but ideally, I like a mix of sources, so, basically, here is the list I use, in no particular order. I'm always open to additions, if anyone thinks I'm lacking:

1. Russia To-err, The Guardian
2. NPR
3. Al Jazeera
4. NY Times
5. The Hindu
6. The Economist
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,271 Posts
There's no such thing as a neutral news outlet. All are biased but that doesn't mean all equally biased of course.

Best decision is to get the news from a wide array of sources.

With that said, for international news I check BBC, The Guardian, El País, Al Jazeera, Electronic Intifada (for Palestinian related news only) and Hareetz. But to be honest, more often than not I rarely check them. I usually just read my local papers and if I see a news that gets my interest I google it to see what other media outlets are saying.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,733 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
I read the Guardian personally, and the BBC. I guess that suites my particular liberal agenda but what can I do, the Times is really dog shit these days. the Torygraph is better but the editorials are often vomit inducing (than again the bias in the Guardian is painful at times regarding editorials). I love the BBC and think its fantastic, ironically the government controlled news service is arguably among the most impartial because it is government owned and therefore constrained by rules (though again Conservatives would argue its biased against them, hope they don't sell it off mind).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,771 Posts
NY Times: the best for lengthy and wide-ranging reporting with relatively little bias; I'd read it more often if the the writers were better as many articles are too dry and rambling for my taste

WSJ: non-editorial section ONLY; covers the important stories very well and is concise, which I appreciate, but the breadth of coverage isn't the best outside financial news

Guardian: used to read the Guardian Weekly as a kind of leftist alternative to the Economist; use only their website now and they emphasize their editorials and fluff stories there so much that I find myself reading their serious reports less than I used to

Economist: the best writers; every single article is biased from a classically liberal perspective and that's fine if you know to account for it since they're generally fair and fact-based before drawing their conclusions; seemingly a few ideological hacks on the staff and I'd like it if they broke with tradition to reveal article authors so I'd know which articles were likely to be sub-par

BBC (for international stories) and NPR (for American stories): the only non-print journalism widely available in the US that's not either a) superficial in their reporting, b) pure fluff, c) massively biased; there admittedly is a good amount of fluff to be found on both but the lead stories are usually worth a listen; BBC World News TV is particularly good and has less fluff than the radio World Service but it's unfortunately only available for two hours a day where I live

As for sources to avoid, Fox News gets a lot of deserved hate but CNN is just appallingly bad these days. Unrelenting fluff and piss poor analysis when they actually make an effort to report on something serious. Their international station seems better but they stopped simulcasting it at all on their US station; probably didn't want Americans to see just how bad their domestic channel was by comparison. MSNBC is also generally worth avoiding besides the excellent Maddow, though Korniacki has impressed me when filling in for her; neither are sources of anything approaching unbiased reporting of course.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
25,190 Posts
The Aviation Herald

Wikipedia: The Aviation Herald daily reports about incidents and critical situations in the civil aviation companies. The service is recognized as accepted industry service for safety relevant occurrences. Behind the English language service stands Simon Hradecky of Salzburg, Austria - an expert in Aviation Safety. Events in Aviation are reported since Jun 19th 1999 until nowaday.
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top