What is your go to news outlet?

[voodoo_man]

When you want to know what the news for the day is, where do you go? What channel do you turn on?

I ask because I saw this play out on Fox News (http://www.bizpacreview.com/2015/06/19/oreilly-confronts-s-c-lawmaker-who-said-fox-news-hate-speech-caused-charleston-shooting-215480) and I started to wonder what news outlet Todd Rutherford (the guy in the video) watches that he believes are 100% factual.

Just a note before the question will be raised - It has been my experience that the media (in general) lies about nearly anything they can't get info about. They leave out certain information and include others for the purpose of satisfying their agenda (race of doers when it is black on white crime for example). I do not trust the media, I watch it when I get a chance to hear what the current events are.

What satisfies your news itch?

[Chance]

BBC News is the only place I go for news anymore. They still have some journalism standards, and make a good effort at remaining objective.

[rauchman]

I go to multiple news sources. By reading content from sources with different biases, I sort of get a hint at the truth.

NPR
Al Jazeera
BBC
Economist
Various industry websites ( I work in natural food, specialty food, tea and coffee). From these, lots of info regarding geopolitical agendas and local issues where items are sourced. I'm sure other industry sites would be similar.

I don't typically watch/read FOX, MSNBC, CNN. CNN just blows and FOX and MSNBC are too biased, editorial and sensationalized.

[Kyle Reese]

Generally no commercial, prime time American news outlets. Concur with the BBC. They also have excellent programs and documentaries.

[ssb]

I read a couple of different forums and watch the users do the discussion. They'll aggregate a bunch of different sources, so it's a mixed bag. Their discussion tends to be more reasonable (usually -- M4C often being an exception) and informed than the media's.

CNN is usually the one on TV at the gym, so I'll watch that as I'm doing my thing since I'm not much of a sports fan. At home I don't watch news at all. If I'm reading on my own, I like RealClearPolitics for opinion (pretty wide range of views), and usually CNN and Washington Post for headlines.

[Hambo]

Al Jazeera, BBC, and NPR would be my top three, although I do sometimes watch a French news program. Fox and MSNBC are for their true believers. CNN runs a bunch of bullshit programs so it's hard to tell what might even pass for news there.

[TGS]

BBC just to catch up on stuff.

If I want to learn a little about a specific topic, VICE news has some great investigative journalism. The staff are obviously all hipsters, but with the exception of one Arabic descent dude, I don't really think their stuff is biased heavily enough to care.

Oh, and WSJ.....how could I forget them.

[rauchman]

BBC just to catch up on stuff.

If I want to learn a little about a specific topic, VICE news has some great investigative journalism. The staff are obviously all hipsters, but with the exception of one Arabic descent dude, I don't really think their stuff is biased heavily enough to care.

Oh, and WSJ.....how could I forget them.

Good call. Forgot about that one.

[voodoo_man]

BBC just to catch up on stuff.

If I want to learn a little about a specific topic, VICE news has some great investigative journalism. The staff are obviously all hipsters, but with the exception of one Arabic descent dude, I don't really think their stuff is biased heavily enough to care.

Oh, and WSJ.....how could I forget them.

VICE?

Funny story about them, know a guy I graduated HS with who took an entry level job at VICE out of college. He quit a few months later because he was bullied non-stop because of his right-leaning views (raised in middle-PA, very conservative and catholic upbringing, parents consider themselves "people of faith" all that).

Not ragging on the outlet, every outlet has good and bad stuff they produce, but I equate VICE with Salon in terms of being anti-right, anti-white, anti-gun. (edit; my opinion of the two...)

[ssb]

Not ragging on the outlet, every outlet has good and bad stuff they produce, but I equate VICE with Salon in terms of being anti-right, anti-white, anti-gun. (edit; my opinion of the two...)

Specific to their gun stuff and their coverage of a KKK rally where I live, I found their coverage fair. They certainly didn't come across as pro-gun, but they didn't come across as anti-gun either. They didn't seem seem to have the traditional assumptions the media makes every time we have a gun "conversation." They like to let the parties involved in their reporting speak for themselves, rather than trying to set up a bunch of "gotcha" moments. Sometimes -- as in the KKK coverage -- that doesn't turn out too well for those parties. YMMV.

[trailrunner]

I used to read the WSJ religiously, but I noticed a change downward after they were sold to Murdoch around 2007 or 2008. I still think are pretty good, but I don't pay for it any more and don't read it consistently.

[voodoo_man]

Specific to their gun stuff and their coverage of a KKK rally where I live, I found their coverage fair. They certainly didn't come across as pro-gun, but they didn't come across as anti-gun either. They didn't seem seem to have the traditional assumptions the media makes every time we have a gun "conversation." They like to let the parties involved in their reporting speak for themselves, rather than trying to set up a bunch of "gotcha" moments. Sometimes -- as in the KKK coverage -- that doesn't turn out too well for those parties. YMMV.

Ill have to see if I can find the articles I was referring to, but I specifically remember that they did exactly what you are saying they did not. Of course it could have been years ago, different editor, different journalist, etc.

[Drang]

I use the Google News app on my phone, and the Feedly news aggregator service, via the GReader app on phone and tablet. I find that the RSS feeds of the local papers keep me up-to-date on local issues (Seattle Times and Tacoma News-Tribune), and the Google News feed does the same for national/international news. Plus Instapundit and Powerline.

Also, Drudge. Always fun to see his "drudgetapostions", where two seemingly unrelated items are put next to each other, to (often) call out the foolishness and/or hypocrisy of the rich, famous, and powerful. Despite those, Drudge is another aggregator, not a reporter/commentator/pundit as such.

I have The Rumford Meteor - Maine news from the seat of Oxford County (http://rumfordmeteor.com/) in my news feed for the headlines. It inspired a tag on the blog, "The Art Of The Headline", or gems such as this:
Farmer’s Market Rejects Offer to Locate in Supermarket Parking Lot, Figuring No One Going to a Supermarket Is Likely to Be Thinking About Buying Food (http://rumfordmeteor.com/farmers-market-rejects-offer-to-locate-in-supermarket-parking-lot-because-no-one-going-to-a-supermarket-is-thinking-about-buying-food/)

I rarely watch TV news, never one of the national programs. let alone the channels.


I used to read the WSJ religiously, but I noticed a change downward after they were sold to Murdoch around 2007 or 2008. I still think are pretty good, but I don't pay for it any more and don't read it consistently.

Their editorial pages are still generally right-of-center, but their reporters are like most reporters based out of the Least Coast Megalopolis.

[TGS]

Ill have to see if I can find the articles I was referring to, but I specifically remember that they did exactly what you are saying they did not. Of course it could have been years ago, different editor, different journalist, etc.

I have to agree with sboers.

Besides that, they do a lot of investigative journalism overseas which is usually outside of the left/right political divide, and I really enjoy watching. The only one I can specifically remember that was heavily biased/trying to lead the viewer was the Arab descendant reporting on a Palestine/Israeli situation. It was pretty much garbage, purposely trying to portray the Israeli's as evil. It was obvious the guy had an agenda and I haven't seen him do reports in any of the videos I've watched since.

[MGW]

The onion.

[Chance]

If you're on Twitter, there are some great feeds, like @USOSINT, for news. You can also follow the big name networks to get headlines, then go to reputable news sources for the details.

Honestly, Al Jazeera does a pretty good job too, but I stay away from them out of principle.

[98z28]

I almost never watch TV anymore. It's local news or BBC if I happen to turn it on. I like WSJ for headlines and the editorials. The Economist is where I go for actual news with details. It's superb.

[98z28]

I waited too long to edit my original post to add this:

Be warned that the Economist is British and the authors are not afraid to give opinions. Be prepared to filter. The authors are usually knowledgeable, but it is like one long editorial. While I don't agree with many of their conclusions, it's refreshing to see opinions supported with evidence. The articles are like reading discussions from SMEs. Their world might not be yours, but the insight gained from their knowledge and experience is worth sifting through.

[Kyle Reese]

http://www.borderlandbeat.com/

and

http://www.longwarjournal.org/

are excellent resources also. LWJ in particular has up to the minute updates on the situation(s) in Iraq and elsewhere in the Middle East and Central Asia.

[GardoneVT]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/69/Kohler_toilet.JPG

[JAD]

Wsj daily. National Catholic Register when it comes. EWTN on the radio, very occasionally, though I tend to listen to sports talk from March through December.