# Where do you get your news?



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

For me it’s hard because there seem fewer and fewer sites reporting “just the facts.” I watch CNN, Fox, and the BBC. I watched Aljazeera as well, but it seems to have given up in my market.

How about you?


----------



## Tristan (Jan 5, 2013)

Most of my news comes from CNN, NPR, the New Yorker, and BBC. I don't watch much TV news. I get CNN alerts for breaking news, I listen to news-related podcasts on NPR including ones from BBC, and I subscribe to and regularly read the New Yorker.


----------



## Bettina (Sep 29, 2016)

New York Times, New Yorker, and New Republic (I just realized that all of my favorite news sources contain the word "new" ). 

When I read the news, I often don't want "just the facts." I prefer to read thought-provoking interpretations of those facts. It's a lot like listening to music--I'm not interested in "just the notes." I want to hear a performer's take on those notes!


----------



## TwoFlutesOneTrumpet (Aug 31, 2011)

The interweb. Google knows what I want to know  I don't remember the last time I watched TV.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Always watch the 20.00 news, newspapers and internet from time to time.


----------



## Krummhorn (Feb 18, 2007)

Google news ... broadcast TV here is like the actual news program is interrupting the commercials ... 2 minutes of news, 7 minutes of commercial ... bleh ... won't have any of that. 

I am selective on what news I do read ... usually local stuff mostly. All the world and nation crap is the same mindless blather repeated over and over again ... the same thing all day long every day ad nauseum.


----------



## ldiat (Jan 27, 2016)

oh the internet of course...facebook-twitter-instagram etc hey the interner is always right,,,,,,isn't it??


----------



## Granate (Jun 25, 2016)

I read online newspapers from Spain _(El País_ & _El Mundo)_ and I listen to the radio.
If I just were to have live and little biased information about politics, I tune _Al Rojo Vivo_ in La Sexta TV (just for Spain).
I do wish that I had a news source on my feedly that reported a good deal of international news about Europe, Asia and the States.
Well, for the US' news I am already hooked with Stephen Colbert, Trevor Noah, John Oliver and Seth Meyers. Thanks YT.

When I was a kid I used to dig in evening news programs, but when I departed to Uni and studied Media and Spectacle I realised I had been wasting my time.

I suppose that unbias has been officialy sacrificed. It is our responsibility to be critical with the content we consume.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Bettina said:


> New York Times, New Yorker, and New Republic (I just realized that all of my favorite news sources contain the word "new" ).
> 
> When I read the news, I often don't want "just the facts." I prefer to read thought-provoking interpretations of those facts. It's a lot like listening to music--I'm not interested in "just the notes." I want to hear a performer's take on those notes!


 A Liberal. That's fine.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

The Wall Street Journal. Conservative. Intellectual. Doesn't insult my intelligence.

Fox News is always on in my house. Both my wife and I watch it religiously.

We are both conservative politically.

I even dislike Bach played on piano. Very straight. Very conservative.

I've always been this way. No lightning strikes. :lol:


----------



## Bettina (Sep 29, 2016)

hpowders said:


> Ouch! A Liberal.


Was it really that obvious from my post? :lol:

Well, yes, you caught me...I confess to the charge of liberalism. Sometimes I even enjoy hearing Bach played on the piano WITH PEDAL!


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Bettina said:


> Was it really that obvious from my post? :lol:
> 
> Well, yes, you caught me...I confess to the charge of liberalism. Sometimes I even enjoy hearing Bach played on the piano WITH PEDAL!


The news sources you quoted are all liberal publications.

Okay. You didn't have to hit me over the head with a sledge hammer thanks to:
enjoying Bach on piano + pedal. Now I need an aspirin. Probably three.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

I'm afraid to admit it publicly; it seems like whatever you view is, somebody is going to camp on your doorstep with a protest sign. I read mostly news websites. I follow two which I agree with and another site which I totally disagree with but read anyway to see how the other half thinks.


----------



## SarahNorthman (Nov 19, 2014)

Straight from hell.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

SarahNorthman said:


> Straight from hell.


How come Sarah?


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

For the news about Wagner and 4'33", I simply come here. Truth reigns!!


----------



## TxllxT (Mar 2, 2011)

When I want to get news I read hpowers


----------



## Tristan (Jan 5, 2013)

Bettina said:


> New York Times, New Yorker, and New Republic (I just realized that all of my favorite news sources contain the word "new" ).
> 
> When I read the news, I often don't want "just the facts." I prefer to read thought-provoking interpretations of those facts. It's a lot like listening to music--I'm not interested in "just the notes." I want to hear a performer's take on those notes!


Yep, that's why I like the New Yorker. It's more of an analysis than just straight up listing facts at you. I often get the "list of facts" from various sources through Google News, but then I'll turn to something like the New Yorker to find out people's takes on the news.


----------



## bz3 (Oct 15, 2015)

The New Yorker has gone downhill IMO. I canceled my subscription a couple of years ago and occasionally browsing what they make available online hasn't made me regret that decision. Monopolization of media has really done a number on the major outlets - they all act like they have to justify an ideology even in their run-of-the-mill reporting. 

WSJ, Reuters, NYT, AP newswire releases are my go-to. Sometimes I'll look at Al Jazeera to see what the billionaire Muslim world wants me to think, the same for the billionaire Russian world with RT. I've given up on CNN, WaPo, Gannett outlets (like USA Today and various "local" papers they bought), and all the television folks. Fake news! Very sad!


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

TxllxT said:


> When I want to get news I read hpowers


And here we disagree.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

bz3 said:


> The New Yorker has gone downhill IMO. I canceled my subscription a couple of years ago and occasionally browsing what they make available online hasn't made me regret that decision. Monopolization of media has really done a number on the major outlets - they all act like they have to justify an ideology even in their run-of-the-mill reporting.
> 
> WSJ, Reuters, NYT, AP newswire releases are my go-to. Sometimes I'll look at Al Jazeera to see what the billionaire Muslim world wants me to think, the same for the billionaire Russian world with RT. I've given up on CNN, WaPo, Gannett outlets (like USA Today and various "local" papers they bought), and all the television folks. Fake news! Very sad!


Good places to get the latest bzfeed.


----------



## SarahNorthman (Nov 19, 2014)

Pugg said:


> How come Sarah?


Not that this has ever been something in existence; but there is no such thing as credible journalism. It has only ever gotten worse as the years have gone on and now I fear people have no idea what that looks like anymore. Everything is edited to be taken out of context and it is disgusting.


----------



## Vaneyes (May 11, 2010)

Supermarket checkouts, Daily News, and TC...in that order!


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

BBC, PBS, NPR, all set against the backdrop of reading extensively in history and biography, looking for the larger trends and patterns.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

SarahNorthman said:


> Not that this has ever been something in existence; but there is no such thing as credible journalism. It has only ever gotten worse as the years have gone on and now I fear people have no idea what that looks like anymore. Everything is edited to be taken out of context and it is disgusting.


If this is true, how do/can you know what is credible journalism?


----------



## SarahNorthman (Nov 19, 2014)

Strange Magic said:


> If this is true, how do/can you know what is credible journalism?


Fact checking. Making sure your sources are reliable ones. That is just high school 101. In addition I believe that a hallmark of good credible journalism is NOT twisting words or facts to support your own shady agenda. I think when it comes to journalism your only agenda should be to give forth-write and factual based news to the people without using fear tactics to sway them in a particular direction.

Sadly this will never be.

I am not sure if I am conveying myself the way I mean to. Hopefully this makes sense.


----------



## znapschatz (Feb 28, 2016)

SarahNorthman said:


> Fact checking. Making sure your sources are reliable ones. That is just high school 101. In addition I believe that a hallmark of good credible journalism is NOT twisting words or facts to support your own shady agenda. I think when it comes to journalism your only agenda should be to give forth-write and factual based news to the people without using fear tactics to sway them in a particular direction.
> 
> Sadly this will never be.
> 
> I am not sure if I am conveying myself the way I mean to. Hopefully this makes sense.


A grounding in history, social studies and (very important) engagement in issues helps in sorting out the various sources of information. Nothing can be depended upon as wholly credible, because even the most scrupulous observer/reporter has biases. Most make the effort to get everything right, and I know this because I have been one of them. Very few try to slant things, but are sometimes at the mercy of superiors who are not as scrupulous. I've seen that across the political spectrum.

It is important, as well, to recognize one's own predispositions. The millionaire and the wage worker, for example, have widely different interests that color their perceptions. Each can receive the same accurate information and have reactions at a great variance. I can only advise "know thyself," and that helps getting through the thicket.


----------



## znapschatz (Feb 28, 2016)

In response to the topic; I get my information from almost every source available, regardless of pedigree, my own research, and being there. Nothing beats being an eyewitness, even a participant.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

SarahNorthman said:


> Fact checking. Making sure your sources are reliable ones. That is just high school 101. In addition I believe that a hallmark of good credible journalism is NOT twisting words or facts to support your own shady agenda. I think when it comes to journalism your only agenda should be to give forth-write and factual based news to the people without using fear tactics to sway them in a particular direction.
> 
> Sadly this will never be.
> 
> I am not sure if I am conveying myself the way I mean to. Hopefully this makes sense.


Fact checking. This used to be a bit easier, perhaps, in the past. But these days the gravitational pull of powerful ideologies is enough to warp the Fact matrix such that one can now have one's own special set of facts. The sad history of the continuing denial of the reality of climate change/anthropogenic global warming is truly dismaying. While I am the first to affirm that science is a human and constantly evolving enterprise, the near-universal agreement of the scientific community on the reality and the menace of rapid global warming would have generated a strong let's fix this response if science had not run head-on into the insane rat's nest of its opponents. The opponents will A: deny that the warming is happening. If that fails to persuade, then there is B: there is no human component; it's just Mother Nature. Failing that, we move to C: whether it's human-caused or not, it's really a Good Thing after all.

The same arguments, for the same reasons, circulate on whether there can be Endless Growth--in economies, in populations, in exploitation of natural resources, food stocks, fisheries, forests. Scientists have been aware of and writing about such issues--and issuing warnings about them, credibly--now for nearly a century. And ideologues, often economists with an axe to grind, knowing little or nothing about the underlying scientific disciplines or findings, pontificate endlessly against such deliverers of Bad News.

Facts. They're out there. But they're now harder to find.


----------



## Kieran (Aug 24, 2010)

I read a lot on both the Telegraph and Guardian sites. They talk about the same stuff, but they spin it in their own shop. I don't mind that. I like reading opinion pieces that raise the hackles. I'm not too hung up on the news. I follow big news stories but as often as not, I'll check tennis news before anything, and I get that from tennis.com, and the BBC...


----------



## Jos (Oct 14, 2013)

NRC Handelsblad (dutch newspaper) , BBC , hangthebankers.com , Salon.com , Wired , ThoughtMaybe.com for documentaries.

All in moderation because it distracts from listening to music, and given the state of the world I prefer doing the latter more and more.


----------



## Judith (Nov 11, 2015)

BBC, Classic FM for bulletins, local newspaper "Yorkshire Evening Post" for news in the area and some of the morning papers such as Daily Mail and Daily Express.


----------



## znapschatz (Feb 28, 2016)

SarahNorthman said:


> Not that this has ever been something in existence; but there is no such thing as credible journalism. It has only ever gotten worse as the years have gone on and now I fear people have no idea what that looks like anymore. Everything is edited to be taken out of context and it is disgusting.


In the early days of the United States, almost all news publications were highly partisan, often dishonestly so. It has been reported that the revered Founding Father Thomas Jefferson actually paid journalists to print false stories about then political opponent FF John Adams, an apparently standard ploy of the era. Discerning readers knew that well, and made allowances by considering the source when getting their news. To an extent, that is true today, but most journalism now is far more objective because competition requires that. It is too easy to fact check. 
Because of resources and current methods of communication, it is entirely possible that there may be more accurate journalism today than ever before, but also a veritable blizzard of misinformation (cough-foxfox) that competes with it. That makes it seem like the profession has deteriorated, but I believe the opposite has taken place. If you know what to look for, it isn't that difficult to get the straight story.


----------



## Krummhorn (Feb 18, 2007)

znapschatz said:


> . . . If you know what to look for, it isn't that difficult to get the straight story.


So true ... one of those I found recently was the ProPublica site promoting Journalism in the Public Interest. Another source I use is Reuters.


----------



## Varick (Apr 30, 2014)

Multiple and various sources. TV, Magazines, Newspapers, online news sites such as Real Clear Politics. They take the best articles from both sides and publish without any editing on their end.

One does have to sift through and know the language (aka: vernacular) that so much of the news media uses today to be able to "read between the lines."

I don't care that the NY Times, LA Times, Washington Post, Boston Globe, St. Louis Dispatch, Chicago Tribune, London Times, et al BBC, CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, Al Jazeera, NPR, Time Magazine, US News & World Report, Newsweek, and pretty much all of main stream media are left wing (same goes for Hollywood, the Arts World, public schools and colleges & universities). What drives me crazy is that NONE of them have the *intellectual honesty and integrity* to admit it.

Notice I did not mention MSNBC or Fox News. The former is left wing, the latter is right wing. Neither of them deny it. That is why I can at least respect them for being honest of who and what they are. They don't try to hide it or pretend to be something else.

One other note on this topic, I find a lot of people miss an important point: Just because one is "left" or "conservative" doesn't necessarily mean that they can't give accurate and truthful information. Two publications come to mind on both sides: The New Republic and National Review. Both honest, accurate, and truthful in almost all their articles. Just often opposite/different conclusions and opinions about ideas.

V


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Varick said:


> Multiple and various sources. TV, Magazines, Newspapers, online news sites such as Real Clear Politics. They take the best articles from both sides and publish without any editing on their end.
> 
> One does have to sift through and know the language (aka: vernacular) that so much of the news media uses today to be able to "read between the lines."
> 
> ...


Real Clear Politics is a diamond among internet trash news.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

I'm finding some of the posts in this thread to be valuable. Of course maybe that's just because I agree with them!


----------



## senza sordino (Oct 20, 2013)

CBC television and radio. BBC internet and sometimes world news on the television. The Guardian online. I watch MSNBC, though I will freely admit Rachel Maddow, whom I watch, is not news, she spins the news. I don't get Fox News on my cable package. I sometimes watch CTV local news, to catch up on what's happening locally. Though this news is generally awful because they buy a couple of local sensational news items from other local stations every night, usually American. 

I find it curious that people on the right think that the media is left wing, people on the left think not. I think here in Canada our private media leans right. Case in point, the journalists who jump ship and join a political party join the right wing parties. (Here in Canada). CBC is probably liberal friendly. Though working in a union on the left coast of Canada my views are biased, so take whatever I said as liberally biased.


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

BBC, Aljazeera, Sky News, RT, Google News, local radio and TV, CNN, LBC and of course the News Papers.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Dan Ante said:


> BBC, Aljazeera, Sky News, RT, Google News, local radio and TV, CNN, LBC and of course the News Papers.


I do think one of the best around these days.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

Mostly the CBC website and iPhone app. I try not to read the news as much anymore.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

I have noticed as a very recent phenomenon that the major network TV outlets (ABC, CBS, NBC) have taken to doing instant fact-checking now that Trump got elected. Prior to his election, the major media treated him as a curiosity, an entertainer, a doofus not to be taken seriously but rather one to quote without comment, other than to say "Here's Nutty Donald's latest bizarro utterance." But now, as The Donald sits alone high in Trump Tower late into the night issuing his Twitter Storms, those same media outlets have realized that this is serious stuff now, and they cannot be merely conduits for unverified Trumpian brain explosions. In this sense (only in this sense), the advent of Trump has been a Good Thing, in that it has caused a rethinking of what constitutes responsible journalism today.


----------



## Kivimees (Feb 16, 2013)

National Enquirer.


----------



## Vronsky (Jan 5, 2015)

I read the Guardian (on the Internet) and sometimes I watch the BBC One debates.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Kivimees said:


> National Enquirer.


Get outta here!


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Kivimees said:


> National Enquirer.


"Elvis Clone Found on Mars." Now that's _real _news!


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

hpowders said:


> Get outta here!


Not so fast! You have no idea how much vitally important news is dug up by the fearless journalists of the supermarket tabloids. My most noteworthy example is from another tabloid--_The World_, I think it is or was called-- they showed an actual photograph of then-president George Herbert Walker Bush walking on the deck of an aircraft carrier while speaking with an Alien from Outer Space. The alien looked just like the depictions we've seen elsewhere. I was so startled that I showed it immediately to my wife, and said we must look for this story elsewhere. But, sadly, it was suppressed, and never appeared on the evening TV news, ever. But The National Enquirer continues to probe where others are afraid to probe, and more power to them!


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

Vronsky said:


> I read the Guardian (on the Internet) and sometimes I watch the BBC One debates.


Of course I forgot the online news papers so I also read but not regularly:

The Guardian UK 
NZ Herald 
The Telegraph UK 
The Independent UK 
The New York Times 
The Spectator UK 
The Coventry Telegraph UK


----------



## TxllxT (Mar 2, 2011)

We've got a three-headed satellite dish that keeps us connected to three satellites: Astra 1 for German TV channels, Astra 2 for British TV channels and Astra 3 for Dutch & Czech TV channels. Mostly we watch the Dutch news, BBC 4 and Czech commercial TV. On the internet I follow the news from Dutch, British, Russian & Czech websites with the addition of CNN & TIME and when necessary, some German websites. In Holland there exist also subversive websites like 'GeenStijl' (No Style), that offer sharp anti-establishment journalism (they are the friends of Nigel Farage). Sometimes hilarious, sometimes outraging, sometimes very much to the point. I'm a freethinker.


----------



## Jos (Oct 14, 2013)

upload a gif

This is the source: http://thefederalistpapers.org/poli...n-journalism-since-2009-brilliantly-summed-up


----------



## Lenny (Jul 19, 2016)

I only trust my FB bubble.

Seriously, I don't really read news. It just makes me depressed.


----------



## znapschatz (Feb 28, 2016)

Jos said:


> upload a gif
> 
> This is the source: http://thefederalistpapers.org/poli...n-journalism-since-2009-brilliantly-summed-up


Clearly, there are two (or more) separate realities in the world. This one is bogus, but 
that's my reality  .

I remember a comedy skit on Saturday Night Live about souls entering heaven, where they get to ask God questions about who was right. It turned out that in religion, it was Lutherans all along. Who knew? :angel:


----------



## Jos (Oct 14, 2013)

I'm seeing it as a bit of bogus that might have some truth to it.
Mainstream media is biased and not telling everything, maybe because they don't want to or simply can't because they do not have acces to every aspect of the powers that be, and have to work with what they are given.
I did some internet research (mind you, with a very large pot of salt at hand) and found very depressing stuff, even if only one percent would be true.


----------



## Varick (Apr 30, 2014)

Jos said:


> upload a gif
> 
> This is the source: http://thefederalistpapers.org/poli...n-journalism-since-2009-brilliantly-summed-up


The truth of this is undeniable. Fantastic!

V


----------



## Vaneyes (May 11, 2010)

Jos said:


> I'm seeing it as a bit of bogus that might have some truth to it.
> Mainstream media is biased *and not telling everything*, maybe because they don't want to or simply can't because they do not have access to every aspect of the powers that be, and have to work with what they are given.
> I did some internet research (mind you, with a very large pot of salt at hand) and found very depressing stuff, even if only one percent would be true.


Yes, tip-toeing around the heart of a story, as recently discussed on CNN.

http://money.cnn.com/2017/02/12/media/andrew-sullivan-donald-trump-mental-health/index.html


----------



## Varick (Apr 30, 2014)

Vaneyes said:


> Yes, tip-toeing around the heart of a story, as recently discussed on CNN.
> 
> http://money.cnn.com/2017/02/12/media/andrew-sullivan-donald-trump-mental-health/index.html


Lol. The hysteria of the left knows no bounds. I wish all these "fact checkers" were around the last 8 years. Odd that they were conspicuously silent during that time.

V


----------



## znapschatz (Feb 28, 2016)

I read _The Columbus Dispatch_, a fairly reliable source that usually leans Republican, subscribe to _The Nation_, _The New Yorker_ and _The Progressive_, watch mainstream television news and a few current events talk shows, mostly but not all liberal. Here I out myself as politically radical, but take in news from all points of view. I don't agree the media is hopelessly biased, which I believe to be a cynical and erroneous attitude. That with which I disagree, at least I try to understand.


----------



## TxllxT (Mar 2, 2011)

*The Grannies are taking over the internet*






An interesting trend on the Russian speaking internet: the massive youngsters' rule over the internet blogs is fading and behold: the grannies are on the rise! For example this granny from Odessa has a channel with 160.000 followers. Many young women write in the comments, that she reminds them of their own granny with her wisdom & good advice. This Olga from Odessa presents an enormous inventive variety of goodhearted kitchen table talk & subjects, that makes many people's hearts warm up. Perhaps we need this spirited counter-balance in the West too against the soulless rhetoric from the 'official' news media.


----------



## Delicious Manager (Jul 16, 2008)

KenOC said:


> For me it's hard because there seem fewer and fewer sites reporting "just the facts." I watch CNN, Fox, and the BBC. I watched Aljazeera as well, but it seems to have given up in my market.
> 
> How about you?


The BBC has become ridiculously biased towards the 'establishment' and so, although I still watch it, I rely on other sources for more accurate or in-depth reports. I watch the news on Channels 4 and 5 and Al Jazeera for new I feel I can believe in more.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Still Fox News 24/7 for me.


----------



## Vaneyes (May 11, 2010)

Varick said:


> Lol. The hysteria of the left knows no bounds. I wish all these "fact checkers" were around the last 8 years. Odd that they were conspicuously silent during that time.
> 
> V


More "hysteria"...

http://www.theverge.com/2017/2/13/14595898/john-oliver-trump-last-week-tonight


----------

