Where you get your (hopefully) unbiased news from?

[Malkavia]

As someone who studies international politics I always try to read different new sources online to get an objective view. "Objective Journalism" is actually something new popping up in the last few decades and it has a ways to go.

However for the most unbiased news I usually use BBC World News or the Christian Science Monitor. Both of these is what I have constantly been told by my most respected professors that these will be some of the closest to objective reporting I can find.

What do you use?

[Pandemonium]

There is no such thing as unbiased new broadcasting. Your best bet is have multiple different sources for the same story. Don't solely rely on the mainstream because they regurgitate each other.

Here is my list:

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[RedIrish]

I go to BBC and CBC. I have not been happy with the bias shown in the print media, and usually track multiple sources. The Times, NYT, and Globe and Mail are usually where I end up.

[SuperBenjamin]

I can speak and fluent with 3 different language, Hebrew+some Aramaic , English and Chinese. Sometimes it is surprising how different some sources view the same thing. The english and Hebrew news will generally blame Iran for being unreasonable. The Chinese on the other hand will sometimes talk about America wanting more control over the middle east and how America + Israel = BAD. About the same story with Iran.

I would love to know how the Russians view it. I am sure it will be different again. Unbiased news? I don't know if it exist. i can't tell you to learn a few languages but if you really want a broad view, get a translator software and devour the news.


All the best.

[RBM]

Unbiased news reporting is a myth, carried over from the days of one way news delivery systems and such as broadcast TV and newspapers. Doc Searls has written much about the history and the historical technical systems versus now.

For those interested in Russia's perspective, as a starting point, I use Steve LeVine's blog - Steve is a professional journo for Business Week and an author of a book on Russia/Putin. He has lived in the area and keeps up with professional and social connections to those who live there now, or otherwise have business in the region.

Re:OP

I get my news online. as a result of cost of TV service versus value of content and function.
There are many caveats to that endeavor, just as there was with the previous systems, the caveats are just different.

[Synamon]

There is no unbiased news. I avoid the US media and look for multiple sources of information from different points of view, when possible.

[Stickman]

If you strip away all opinions, speculations, motivations, and feelings than all you're left with are the facts. In this sense, all news sources can be a source of unbiased information; all you have to do is distill it. Take the Nobel Peace prize as an example. Some news sources will say that Obama didn't deserve it while others do but that is just their opinion; no news source will deny that he didn't win it because that's a fact.

Now, the only caveat is that the omission of some facts can skew our perception. In our above example it might be important to know that the Nobel Peace prize did have precedent for awarding individuals for their aspirations rather than their deeds. (PS, I'm not trying to start a discussion on the Nobel Peace Prize, there's a thread for that)

To be honest, I barely read the news. Internet forums like this one usually follow the dialogue presented in newspapers and TV networks anyways. The opinions of strangers isn't important to me but basic facts and historical facts that provide context is.

[Talkahuano]

I typically go to CNN and BBC to get the gist of something, and then I go to forums to find out what people think.
I love a good discussion. <3

[endless]

reading between the lines.

[MartinH]

bbc, cnn and relevant foriegn new sites (Xinhua, al-jazeera, etc) for perspective

stratfor.com for analysis.

[Mader]

Christian Science Monitor, sticking to the news column as opposed to the commentary column.

Then, as has been mentioned already, the internet and searching the subject.

I try to remember what my 8th grade teacher taught me: the questions to ask are who, what, where, when, why, and how.

[HalfPint]

I keep a pretty complete Google Reader, not just of news sources (BBC, the Times, Wall Street Journal, al-jazeera, etc.) but of major outlets including New Scientist, Popular Science, Advertising Age, Five Thirty Eight, Slashfood, TED, the Dieline, and more.

My reasoning for this is that applicable news will also be covered in specialized sources, giving me a more well-rounded look at people and events and, hopefully, shedding some light on why certain things are news in their respective categories and providing context for them.

[Lonpone]

It's better to learn how to detect bias in newscasts rather than try to limit your options. Being able to do that lets a person:

1. To know what's happening in the world.

2. How a cross section of the population may interpret it.

3. What is considered important to said groups.

[khadi]

NPR
DemocracyNow (far left)
the LA Times, because it's here and I like feeling real paper

[TigerL]

When I had more time in college, I used to read World Press Review (don't know if it still exists). It contained English translations of newspapers from around the world so you could see different perspectives of the same event.

[Samoan Corleone]

Otago has an independent press. I've yet to read it, but I trust it has less degrees of bias than any other city paper here.

[SeaCzar]

There is no better place to find unbiased news than the Financial Times (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.). I have it delivered to the house. Also, the BBC (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.). For a more liberal view, and for unique insight as to what is going on in the nation's capitol, see the Washington Post (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.). For the conservative point of view, see The Wall Street Journal (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.).

[SirJac]

I get alot of my news from the globe and mail, doesn't lean to far left or right. But in general I pay more attention to the opinion articles then the news stories themselves. One of the reasons I particularly like the globe and mail is that all their online stories include an active comment section which can often be more enlightening then the story itself. The great thing about the internet is that it is full of people that love to prove other people wrong, so any false statement made will always be challenged in the comments. If a statement is not challenged in an open forum that has a diverse enough user base, then taking it as truth generally safe. Also open forums serve as a useful barometer of general opinion of the topic in question since posts themselves will lean one way or the other and some comments will receive more general support then others.

Any open forum will exibit these properties and they can be taken advantage of if understood to get a clearer picture of not only the facts but of popular opinions. If I want to test if a particular perspective is widely shared, I can simply make a comment about it and watch how it is recieved. By choosing which forum I use to gauge opinions, I can select what target audience I want to get perspective from. By getting enough different points of veiws I can attain a greater understanding about a topic then can be acheived by only pursuing facts.

[dnyitray]

For those that have not heard of it, TheOnion is America's finest news source.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Otherwise there is no real unbiased news. I like the my local paper,the BBC mixed in with John Stewart and the Colbert Report.

[lurk]

I consider it a pretty sad day when Stewart and Colbert are considered news.

[Stickman]

I consider it a pretty sad day when Stewart and Colbert are considered news.

I consider them meta-news; that is, news about the news. In this sense they're really excellent, they offer biting and often too-accurate critique on why every news outlet really fail at journalism.

[Chromaholic]

Coast to Coast AM w/George Noory. (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.) love it, can't get enough of it and it's an insomniacs' best friend. i'm a fiend when it comes to that program, comes on at midnight - 4AM.

i gave up watching the news because it depresses me and i don't like being brainwashed. they're all the same to me. if i watch t.v., it's usually on The Military Channel or The History Channel.

[dnyitray]

I consider it a pretty sad day when Stewart and Colbert are considered news.

Nowadays, it's sad that the news is considered news...

[Lucid]

I get mine from the New York Times, the BBC and for political commentary I go to the Young Turks. I find them superior to most other commentary I've seen.

[Ray9]

I get mine from the New York Times, the BBC and for political commentary I go to the Young Turks. I find them superior to most other commentary I've seen.

Ah, The New York times. The modern American Pravda. I hear it's on the verge of bankruptcy. I also hear Obama says it's too big to fail. Your views make sense to me now.



Maybe this will take it over:



To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[Webbster]

I listen to CBC radio 1. Read the Globe and Mail, the National Post and Google News.

[clementine]

There is no such thing as unbiased news. Even if a journalist tries very hard to be objective, the very act of selecting a news story is a form of bias. A news source cannot report some stories without neglecting to report other stories, thus implying that the reported stories are more newsworthy and important than the non-reported ones. The best you can do is use your brain and always try to see through the bullshit to the facts. There is ALWAYS another side to the story. You have to take it all with a Morton's can of salt. So it doesn't matter which news source you use really; if you're the kind of person who is influenced by biased reporting, you will be screwed no matter what you read. If you are the kind of person who uses her head and is able to filter out useless crap, it doesn't matter what you read either, since you will be able to figure out what actually happened, and use your analytical skills to determine what it means in relation to other current events, etc.

[Lucid]

Ah, The New York times. The modern American Pravda. I hear it's on the verge of bankruptcy. I also hear Obama says it's too big to fail. Your views make sense to me now.

Really, all I should have to say is "I don't watch Fox News" and my views should make sense to you.

Last I heard, the NYT was one of the few major papers to be doing fairly well - though it's possible that's changed since the last I heard. And a google search on your claim that Obama said it was too big to fail has yielded no results. Can you back these up with anything substantial?

Oh yeah, and the NYT is at the heart of a liberal conspiracy, right? Of course they are Ray.

[Malkavia]

Thanks Ray9 for the site.

Best. News. Ever.

[Satyam]

FOX News - The No Spin Zone

[WindKin]

Suprised it hasn't been mentioned, but try To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

It's a news aggregator, sure, but it helps putting the same things from different sources on the same site, to better get an overview of what is what.
I'm sure there are several sites like it, but it's the one I've found with the most active and mature discussions going on in the comments (most of the time anyway)

[Radamisto]

Why do you follow news at all? It seems a waste of time and resources to me. I prefer to spend my time much more productively - studying subjects of real importance and significance to myself, enjoying my life, engaging in egoistic hedonism, philosophising.

[Wintersun]

As many others have said, there is no such thing as unbiased news.

Anything written by a person that has anything less than omniscience will end up biased in some way.

The closest you can get is to read multiple viewpoints and grab the common elements, which will give you information that is true to a large number of points of view, but even that in itself is not perfectly unbiased.

That said, most of the stuff reported in the news is completely useless to me. Other than subjects of conversation, I don't see how Obama winning the Peace Prize (for example) is significant to me when I'm not in America, or even how it could be significant to the average American.

Information that does not improve my life now, or in the future, is nowhere as valuable as information that would, such as technical stuff which we can get on Wikipedia, or doing other stuff to make my life better now (reading Uncyclopedia, generally having fun et cetera).

[Malkavia]

Why do you follow news at all? It seems a waste of time and resources to me. I prefer to spend my time much more productively - studying subjects of real importance and significance to myself, enjoying my life, engaging in egoistic hedonism, philosophising.


Information that does not improve my life now, or in the future, is nowhere as valuable as information that would, such as technical stuff which we can get on Wikipedia, or doing other stuff to make my life better now (reading Uncyclopedia, generally having fun et cetera).

My major and future career requires me to do so. Living in the world of international politics and international non-profit organizations requires me to stay up to date. Other than that I love the news, it's constantly changing and never the same.

It's obvious that there are no unbiased news sources. The main reason why I made this thread is to see where you guys get your news.

[Warrior]

I'll usually go to the Fox News Channel or their web site. Sometimes I'll read the Wall Street Journal. A little less often I'll tune into some other news channels. About the only one I never go to is MSNBC. I used to read US News, but they changed their format and delivery to something I really didn't care for.

I'll second the comments about no source of unbiased news. That used to be something journalists aspired to, but I'm not sure that is the case any more.

[Causa Mortis]

In the order:

The Economist
The BBC
CNN - seems to be the least flagrantly political of the major news outlets.

[pocohauntus]

Though the media is about as accurate as a tv reality show, I don't think morning newscasts should be called reality shows. The reporting is intelligent, theoretically precise, and the reporters themselves care oh so much about us (not enough though). Perhaps it simply appears they try to get it right for us, however, I've noticed they succeed in doing so right around the third attempt. Ironically, those same journalist of which I've already spoken, seem to be close-minded and bound to contract agreements which stipulate bias, so I'm not impressed and I'm not surprised that many of us here see the news as being biased in a particular way.

[Wintersun]

Even if information is unbiased, editing is biased.

News is produced in such a way that it is not only informative, but appealing as well. Making news more interesting invariably loses accuracy.

As a rough guide, the more boring the article is, the more likely it is to be more factual. The Economist seems quite level to me, but I gave up after being bored to death.

[RdtheLiterature]

I hate the news.

[rufsketch1]

I would like to give the guy who mentioned reddit an upvote, but we're not on reddit.

Reddit isn't exactly unbiased, but there are subreddits for more conservative news articles.

[eagleseven]

Wall Street Journal (American Perspective)
Al-Jazeera (Arabic Perspective)
Xinhua (Chinese Government Perspective)

Also, I check a series of libertarian-leaning blogs daily.


And for laughs, I occasional check the New York Times. They've lost all journalistic credibility in my eyes, as they unabashedly publish op-eds as news, particularly in their Business pages. No wonder the NYT is near-bankrupt...

[rahdam]

Newsweek, Washington Post, BBC

[Hotpckts]

No one has mentioned Current yet? Oh well.

Current T.V. and Current.com

It's all user based content, anyone can make an account and post a story. It's Al Gore's baby, and I've liked it for the past few years it's been up.

[Krazy P]

There is no better place to find unbiased news than the Financial Times (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.). I have it delivered to the house. Also, the BBC (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.). For a more liberal view, and for unique insight as to what is going on in the nation's capitol, see the Washington Post (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.). For the conservative point of view, see The Wall Street Journal (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.).

This is a good list to start. I would add Bloomberg. I would also add the Drudge Report.

The other technique I use is to dig very deeply into any subject you might be interested in.

Let's say you see a report that GDP increased by 3%. What is that comprised of? You can dig through a lot of information from a lot of sources and discover that absent the car stimulus and the housing stimulus, GDP was actually negative or perhaps as high as 1%.

Or let's say you saw a story that Chinese GDP grew over 8%. Again, a little digging and you can discover that absent stimulus spending and government-mandated lending, the estimate for actual Chinese GDP was 85% less or again, a little over 1%.

I tend to follow the financial news at present. The issues of the day are really driven by the economy. RE is falling, rents are falling, commercial RE is falling. (Falling rents is actually interesting - a big shift in behavior - a massive reduction in the number of households - household consolidation - is going on right now).

Another story that is happening is something I call "societal acrimony". I really track these stories. It is a dark mood social mood indeed.

Unfortunately, these stories are leading me to the conclusion that a major war is becoming more and more of a possibility...

[MakingIn]

The BBC and The Economist are my preferred sources. The British seem to do a much better job of just reporting facts and being objective than the completely biased nonsense that is the American news media.

I read The Economist every week, and I think my knowledge of world events is drastically improved due to this habit.

[vampyroteuthis]

I agree there's no such thing as unbiased coverage, so I try to cover a bunch of different sources, though I have to admit I usually don't bother with explicitly right-wing ones. Usually check the BBC and The Guardian daily, and occasionally I look at Al-Jazeera for international news in some parts of the world, as well as a few of the leading dailies online from my home country. If I'm interested in something about a particular country I try to look up the names of their major English-language newspapers, if they have any, and then check them out.

And for biased coverage and op-ed pieces that aren't trying to pretend to objectivity, I like the New York Times sometimes, and the Arts & Letters Daily (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.)

[DavidHasselhoff]

1.) Fox - mainly
2.) CNN
3.) MSNBC
4.) WSJ, NYT, DMN, HC