Giving up on internet news

Status
Not open for further replies.
I listen to news podcasts in French and German as well as "Documentaries and "Business Daily" from the BBC. Virtually commercial-free. I also get financial news podcasts from UBS. I don't listen to every single one but I get a more balanced view and get exposed to issues beyond someone's latest tweet.

Then, when it comes time to vote, I sit down a few days before and do a lot of research and make my decisions.
 
I've noticed that I sometimes can find an excellent 'program' on Youtube that fills in any blanks that were not filled in, on purpose, by the initial news item on regular TV.
 
I usually run the browser in private mode. A lot of news web sites now will shut down if they see this.

For now, I move on. But the trend is growing.

Private mode doesn't mean no ads. They are just ticked they can't make me eat tracking cookies. Well, to heck with them.

A local TV station recently went to this model. They were a pioneer in many things internet and High Definition. Now they are a pioneer in blocking people who prefer to not eat tracker cookies. So, good bye to them. I've deleted them from my TV preferences too.
 
Last edited:
NPR is very left leaning IMO... not equally tough... but I will agree it is much better than a lot of the 'news' channels out there...



In fact, of the 4 major ones it is the most even... but still....
Agree.

They have a lot of interesting content that I like but political viewpoint is consistently left.

Which is fine as long as you know and the interesting offsets the useless and for me it does.
 
I like BBC, Aljazeera, Texas Tribune for internet news, PBS Newshour for evening TV news, KUT (Austin NPR) for radio news and Democratic Underground as a social spot for Progressives and Liberals :cool:
 
Last edited:
The news should lean a little left (liberal), isn't that what freedom of the press is about?

And we should all know this by now and adjust accordingly.
 
At least in terms of reporting political news, if there was a site that presented perspectives from the different point of views in an unbiased way, I can imagine it would attract an army of dissatisfied viewers who just want facts without the political spin. Do not understand why this does not happen.

Because no matter what they claim, most people do not want unbiased news. They want affirmation of their beliefs. They want an echo chamber for their thoughts. They want to feel that they are right.
 
There is no such thing as unbiased news since, the bias is in the eyes of the biased viewers.
Right-leaning viewers see neutral news as left-leaning ... and vice versa.
People naturally gravitate to news providers which them feel comfortable, presenting news with the bias that they also share.
It's just human nature.

You can say that the sky appears blue but, you will never get 100% of people to agree on it.
C'est la vie!
 
I recall recently reading that all the stories we tell (including those about our own lives) are both true and false depending on what is included and what is not...
 
Because no matter what they claim, most people do not want unbiased news. They want affirmation of their beliefs. They want an echo chamber for their thoughts. They want to feel that they are right.

Yes, people want affirmation of their beliefs, but I can remember a time when you turned on the news and it did not come across with such a strong political bias. The so called journalists have gone the way of the dodo bird, and are now all just offering editorial opinions based on their parent companies belief. All I am saying is wouldn't it be refreshing to have a news source report the different perspectives on an issue without slanting it one way or another and leave the rest to the viewer to decide what they agree with.
 
Yes, people want affirmation of their beliefs, but I can remember a time when you turned on the news and it did not come across with such a strong political bias. The so called journalists have gone the way of the dodo bird, and are now all just offering editorial opinions based on their parent companies belief. All I am saying is wouldn't it be refreshing to have a news source report the different perspectives on an issue without slanting it one way or another and leave the rest to the viewer to decide what they agree with.



Yes, but since newspapers were invented and before that unique, brief post-War, Three TV Channel Era, newspapers were expressly partisan organs and most big cities had a conservative press and a liberal press to advance the local political patronage/voter turnout machines. In some ways in the Internet era, the media is evolving to be back to the future.

Here’s one paper about it: https://sites.hks.harvard.edu/fs/mbaum/documents/GroelingBaumPartisanNewsWorkingPaper.pdf
 
Many of the so called news reporters are nothing more than 'entertainers' that try to present themselves as investigative reporters until they or their guest get caught lying then they claim they are just expressing their opinion and that their audience knows the difference. From reading the responses in the thread most here seem to gather their news from various sources but I doubt that is typical for the general population, most seem to rely on one news source for all of their news. Most of the 'fake news' stories would be laughable if it wasn't for the number of people that so easily buy into it.
 
AlI am saying is wouldn't it be refreshing to have a news source report the different perspectives on an issue without slanting it one way or another and leave the rest to the viewer to decide what they agree with.


Yes, that would be refreshing! Or something where people engaged in that old debate practice of respectfully describing an opposite point of view.
 
Most of the 'fake news' stories would be laughable if it wasn't for the number of people that so easily buy into it.

As bad or worse than the inaccuracies (and outright lies in some cases) are the glaring omissions that provide "cover" for favoured groups or people.
 
Many of the so called news reporters are nothing more than 'entertainers' that try to present themselves as investigative reporters ...
Wait, you mean comedians are not news reporters?
 
They are all bad (TV or on-line) and getting worse... Some just worse than others. I don't mind the ads but I can't tolerate the extreme bias opinions.


Just report the facts without all the BS drama.

Wouldn't that be refreshing.
 
The news should lean a little left (liberal), isn't that what freedom of the press is about?

And we should all know this by now and adjust accordingly.

That's the lie the media have been telling us for decades.

:confused:

No, that's not what "freedom of the press is about". Not at all. That's not how any of this works.

Freedom of the press means they can print what they want, but they are still subject to libel suits (from individuals, not the government, I think, but IANAL).

So a media outlet can be left, or right leaning (or neither, or both). I'd prefer to just hear the facts and make up my own mind. Facts don't lean. There is no "should" about it.

-ERD50
 
Wait, you mean comedians are not news reporters?

Many of them stopped being comedians years ago. But, they're not reporters either. Most of them are now just angry people ranting on TV clinging to what little audience they once had.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom