Where can one go to get unbiased news?

[zinfamous]

My guess is you probably only watch TV, because "reading sux!"

Only option then, really, is PBS Newshour.

 

[zinfamous]

lol +1

Christian Science Monitor is surprisingly good. NPR is also surprisingly good - having seen their leftwing bias, they actively try to present fair and balanced reportage, which is about the most one can expect from anyone. ABC News Radio used to be surprisingly good and unbalanced - I don't think they are in our market anymore, but I don't listen to much radio - but I have no reason to suspect that they have become strongly biased.

I too think placing the New York Times into the same category as Breitbart, CNN, MSNBC or Fox News is a bridge too far. It's a very liberal paper and pushes a left wing agenda, but it also has a lot of honest reporters still willing to honestly report. Perhaps its sheer size and reputation help overcome its progressive management?

Good call, it's a great source.

 

[Atreus21]

It's easy, free, and fast.

Look in the mirror.

 

[werepossum]

Who determines that, the Ministry of Truth?

The same people who prosecute those who say that which progressives must not hear. Hmmm . . .

 

[FelixDeCat]

The Annandale Advocate has long been known as truth-tellers.

 

[FelixDeCat]

Making fake headlines is easy!

 

[nageov3t]

 

[baydude]

^ NY times and Washington post being "Great source for news" ruined it

And lol @ the middle supposedly being non partisan

 

[Brainonska511]

^ NY times and Washington post being "Great source for news" ruined it

And lol @ the middle supposedly being non partisan

And what's wrong with the Washington Post or the NY Times? Have you read their articles (not the editorials or op-eds, but the actual articles written by journalists)?

For a person who can't figure out what a good news source is and based on some of the dubious stuff you've posted in the past, I'm going to take your opinion with a heaping bag of salt.

 

[nageov3t]

^ NY times and Washington post being "Great source for news" ruined it

And lol @ the middle supposedly being non partisan

to be fair, the infographic does clearly show them to be left-leaning. it's always worth noting that the NY Times was the ones who originally broke Clinton's email scandal and has been criticized throughout the election of covering it too much.

I don't see any problems with considering NPR, BBC, Reuters, and AP to be non-partisan, though.

 

[dullard]

I generally stick with Reuters and NPR. They are both fairly centrist and both strive to report true things rather than fake news to generate anger/enthusiasm for a specific subgroup of people.

That said, you shouldn't be worried so much about bias in the news sources, but instead you should be worried about your own internal bias. If you start reading/listening to/watching a news article and you immediately think that it must be right before fully listening to both sides and analyzing all bits of information, then turn it off. You won't be getting the information correctly when watched through your own biased eyes. You should focus on news articles that may be difficult to read or hear since those are the ones that challenge you to think with new information and different viewpoints than your own.

Thus conservatives really should watch MSNBC and liberals really should be watching FOX in order to counterblance their internal biases.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

And what's wrong with the Washington Post or the NY Times? Have you read their articles (not the editorials or op-eds, but the actual articles written by journalists)?

Even a New York Times public editor can point out the bias in the New York Times, why are you denying it?
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/24/public-editor/liz-spayd-the-new-york-times-public-editor.html?_r=0