Which news source?
Discussion
So, since the BBC bias was exposed over the climategate e-mails, I've begun to question a bit more the reliability of what we are told/sold by the mainstream media.
I've since deleted the BBC news website from the family computer favorites.
I think the Telegraph, and god save me the Daily Mail are a bit more forthright (right wing????)
I've even started reading/watching Russia Today to get a different spin on things.
Bear in mind the Japan reactor thing seems to be going cosmic and its difficult to find on MSM news sites after 7 days.
The whole Libya thing seems to stink - any photos or coverage I've seen of the rebels seems to be highly staged. ( Wag the Dog anyone?)
Just wondering what yoose-guys look at to get a more measured report?
I've since deleted the BBC news website from the family computer favorites.
I think the Telegraph, and god save me the Daily Mail are a bit more forthright (right wing????)
I've even started reading/watching Russia Today to get a different spin on things.
Bear in mind the Japan reactor thing seems to be going cosmic and its difficult to find on MSM news sites after 7 days.
The whole Libya thing seems to stink - any photos or coverage I've seen of the rebels seems to be highly staged. ( Wag the Dog anyone?)
Just wondering what yoose-guys look at to get a more measured report?
Edited by Slyjoe on Monday 28th March 00:15
davepoth said:
It's important to get news from lots of sources, and preferably ones that wouldn't give a s
t about what was going on. Hence I read a lot about the protest in London in the NY Times, as an example.
This, and the others above mentioned, also google for online debates and you can find lot's of blogs on a particular issue. The Daily Mail and other gutter-press should be shot for their crimes against journalism. t about what was going on. Hence I read a lot about the protest in London in the NY Times, as an example.I read the Telegraph, yes there is some bias, and the familiar distortions of the UK press, but probably the best of a bad lot.
Jeff Randal on sky news gives business and finance news without leftwing populist drivel.
For general news I watch Channel 4 news rather than the BBC output. Yes they have their own biases, but at least they don't come across as the media arm of Labour and are aimed at a more intelligent audience.
I also read the Economist, and find it offers a rather different perspective on the UK news.
Jeff Randal on sky news gives business and finance news without leftwing populist drivel.
For general news I watch Channel 4 news rather than the BBC output. Yes they have their own biases, but at least they don't come across as the media arm of Labour and are aimed at a more intelligent audience.
I also read the Economist, and find it offers a rather different perspective on the UK news.
hornetrider said:
It's not the bias that gets me. It's the Sky News style 'ohhh the calamity' type news reporting - I feel like I'm being fed an angle. Try watching AJ for a bit and see the difference in reporting.
I only read their website to be honest so I wouldn't know. I didn't even think about their news programs when I posted.
Frankeh said:
The BBC is the best news source there is, imo. I've never understood the PH hate for it and I've never seen much of a compelling argument against it.
Agreed, although I look at some of the others too and Al Jazeera seems to have it's act together pretty well.IMO neither Sky nor Fox are worth much time at all.
Frankeh said:
The BBC is the best news source there is, imo. I've never understood the PH hate for it and I've never seen much of a compelling argument against it.
Anyone want to take a stab at convincing me the BBC is biased?
I would have to disagree.Anyone want to take a stab at convincing me the BBC is biased?
The BBC is very good at report a news snippet to give you an idea of what is happening in the world. When they go into details and try and be intelligent they fall flat on their faces.
They fail to present the facts in a story when going into detail, they just seem to accumulate a theme relating to the story and say some random facts.
I'd never trust a UK source especially for military related items - its far too controlled.
everything has a bias just how far they take it is the question.
there's very little true investigative journalism from the uk press unless it involves a celeb or immigrants.
very little chances of a british journo can go libya uncover a great story thats neutral and get it published in the uk press.
everything has a bias just how far they take it is the question.
there's very little true investigative journalism from the uk press unless it involves a celeb or immigrants.
very little chances of a british journo can go libya uncover a great story thats neutral and get it published in the uk press.
elster said:
They fail to present the facts in a story when going into detail, they just seem to accumulate a theme relating to the story and say some random facts.
+1 And then you have sky news that get allsorts in expert fields that help them boost the drama but not the real facts, and any expert they do use that has true information but won't follow inline with skys drama panic view they don't get them back for a second time.Is it inherently wrong to take news from a source with roughly the same political outlook as you?
I read and surf the Telegraph - broadly reflects my views.
I listen to R4 news in the van and it makes me grind my teeth in rage at times, but maybe it stops me only taking in news/opinion that reinforces my views.
I read and surf the Telegraph - broadly reflects my views.
I listen to R4 news in the van and it makes me grind my teeth in rage at times, but maybe it stops me only taking in news/opinion that reinforces my views.
Web:
Google News, cross reference stories reported by BBC and similar with Telegraph and your somewhere vaguely near the truth!
Pistonheads - seen a few stories appear on here before news sites, with good cross referencing and a sensible approach to the facts in the discussion that follows
Sky News is ok for a brief headlines roundup
Russia Today for a different viewpoint, good for news in US/USSR/Asia which the BBC ignores.
BBC is good to get a handle on what everyone else THINKS is happening and on what bullst the lefties are sprouting today!
Google News, cross reference stories reported by BBC and similar with Telegraph and your somewhere vaguely near the truth!
Pistonheads - seen a few stories appear on here before news sites, with good cross referencing and a sensible approach to the facts in the discussion that follows
Sky News is ok for a brief headlines roundup
Russia Today for a different viewpoint, good for news in US/USSR/Asia which the BBC ignores.
BBC is good to get a handle on what everyone else THINKS is happening and on what bulls
t the lefties are sprouting today!Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff