There is a tendency to use a particular news service provider in order to stay up to date with what is going on in the world. What are your preferences while considering these questions:
Is your News Service Provider:
1. Accurate, or do they tend to exaggerate in the beginning to get you to watch?
2. Unbiased, or do you see the way the news is presented seems to be political?
3. Timely, do you get the news before the others or much later?
4. Articulate, do they present the information well?
Remember, this may be from any particular source and any kind of media.
These are very important questions. Most news sources are controlled by the same people, or heavily influenced upon - even some you might think more "free".
I live in England and 2 or 3 years ago the BBC made announcements that it would be more independent. This is of course silly, the BBC is controlled by the Government because it's state-owned. Likewise, many other less obvious news sources are state-owned or influenced (though perhaps it might be more accurate to say they are influenced politically by those same forces that control government).
I put together a site, in consequence of this, listing sites that (in my view) are reporting the news accurately and without hidden agendas or vested interests, except the interest of getting truth across to as many people as possible. There's also an excellent article on the very matter you raise which is accessible at the top of the first column on News & Commentary (entitled "How To Analyze the News and What Goes on Around You")
Message Edited! MrSmith: Please see this thread about linking. |
International Level: Junior Politician / Political Participation: 100 10%
I don't watch any television news at all. I rarely listen to the radio news, other than headlines on the local classic rock stations.
I read WorldNetDaily on a frequent basis, and get headlines from CNSNews, so occasionally click through on them. More frequently these days, I read about things on various blogs, which frequently link to multiple sources for their news.
I think that WND is quite balanced, especially on the news, although there might be a conservative bias there. However, it is nothing compared to the leftist, socialist bias of most of the major news media in the US, Canada, and England.
CNSNews is more conservative, especially in its commentary. JewishWorldReview is a fairly conservative commentary website.
International Level: International Guru / Political Participation: 854 85.4%
I agree, WorldNetDaily generally comes out on top for me too despite the occasional weird piece.
I find World Affairs Brief (by Joel Skousen) the best weekly concise commentary on what's going on in the world.
Checking out a few sources is always a good thing of course, rather than relying upon what big mass news source like most.
Let's hope the people have independent minds even if most of the press isn't as independent as it should be!
Dubhdara.
International Level: Junior Politician / Political Participation: 100 10%
I don't watch any TV news -- what a bunch of nonsense! It's all "entertainment" these days: shock value, titillation, scintillation, and which agency can get the scoop on any story, whether it has any value as news or not. I really don't care to watch another "high-speed chase" through downtown Los Angeles, while the anchors give play-by-play commentary. That's not news.
My decision to leave network and cable TV was about 3 years ago, and I've never regretted it. I can get all my news from the internet, including more in-depth weather (and no pornography with it). Unfortunately, our new household now includes some die-hard TV watchers so we have cable again. What a lot of racket.
In my opinion, of course.
Roz
International Level: Ambassador / Political Participation: 595 59.5%
Tonight on Nightline:
At least 5 newspapers, radio, television, a couple of websites, and online newspapers from the U.K. and India. That is my daily diet of news. If you think about it, that is pretty amazing. I think we are blessed to live in a time where we have access to more news than at any other time in history. I believe that is a good thing. But what kind of news are we getting? ABC News, weblogs, Fox News, The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, and Al Jazeera are all there at the Democratic Convention this week. Why do they all need to be there?
There was a time when only the three broadcast networks covered the conventions gavel to gavel and that is how the country watched the conventions unfold. These days, of course, things are different. Firstly, there are no surprises at the conventions. The days of horse-trading in smoke-filled rooms are over. There is not one un-scripted moment this week. So what are all of those journalists doing there? Well firstly, they are not all journalists. They are comedians, they are columnists, they are commentators, they are talk show hosts and reporters and gossip columnists. Each provides a different slice of the same event and they are in business because there is a market for them. Someone who subscribes to The Nation is unlikely to subscribe to The National Review. Someone who reads Salon.com is unlikely to agree with the point of view of The Weekly Standard.
I get most of my national news from the net. Mostly through links on MSNBC.com. My local news I get from channel 7 which is either NBC or CBS in the Boston area, I can't remember which. I watch this channel because they are usually the most accurate with their weather forecasts. I used to watch the other (CBS or NBC) and too often found myself on the motorcycle in a rain storm. I was the only one who didn't know it was supposed to rain.
When there are big National events happening like the 9/11 attacks and aftermath or the initial invasions during the gulf war, I watch Fox News. They are the only conservative news network in this country - I am conservative and prefer my news to have a conservative slant if it must be slanted at all. The other networks are so liberal in their positions it is sickening. I wish we could have unbiased reporting of the news, but since the majority of major news sources in the US insist upon being so biased to the liberal point of view, it is necessary, in my opinion, to have a news source biased to the other side as a counter defense/effect.
International Level: Diplomat / Political Participation: 320 32%
Tenaheff, and others, I would highly recommend this article:
How To Analyze the News
https://www.joelskousen.com/hotissues_news.html
which I thought I posted already (but looked back to my last post to see I had not).
Some services seem more akin to reliability but one must be careful even here in a world filled with so many layers of deception - and that it certainly is!
Dubhdara.
International Level: Junior Politician / Political Participation: 100 10%