oh, politics.

Jan 12, 2004 09:09

I wish I had a reliable source of news and information, and then maybe I could actually form a well-backed opinion and be able to figure out what exactly is under debate here.

It seems to me (and I am very un-informed, so I'm probably wrong) that the US media outlets are not very accurate because they are inherently US-biased, but the non-US media ( Read more... )

politics

Leave a comment

Comments 9

sarianna January 12 2004, 06:11:36 UTC
www.fark.com
awesome news. ;)

Reply

fledglingoflove January 12 2004, 06:16:35 UTC
*pillowbashes*

Reply


cutelildrow January 12 2004, 06:14:47 UTC
Reuters, maybe?

Me, I compare. If something that's based in the US and then something that's based elsewhere agree then there's a point there that's worth dissecting.

I mean, it startled me when, separately, my Anti-US government opinionated and Non-government organization-hired teachers agreed with the pro-government, internationalist teachers.

when two opposing sides agree on something...it's more than well worth a looksie at.

In the end though, it's your opinion, and how you perceive it as right will determine if you're comfortable with it.

Then again, there's the argument that if you're not comfortable with it, find out why to understand yourself a wee bit better.

Reply


elretard January 12 2004, 08:00:32 UTC
There isn't really a reliable news source. At my house we follow BBC news, which is more or less even-handed. My dad and I basically piece together things from CNN, BBC and the Arabian news network to get an idea of what's going on (ANN is even biased, and that makes me angry)

Reply


izuko January 12 2004, 08:55:25 UTC
The days of Murrow are gone. There is nothing out there that is unbiased. The difference is, the "mainstream media" has a severe liberal bias (90% are registered democrats) but claim to be neutral. The right-wing side is honest about our slant (with the exception of Fox, but they still have voices from the left to try to balance things out, not as many as they do the right, but more opposing voice than the mainstream gives conservaties ( ... )

Reply


team_ragnarok January 12 2004, 10:52:12 UTC
Believe it or not, Fox News Channel has a bit of a balance between left- and right-wing programming on it (The Beltway Boys and The O'Reilly Factor vs. Your World with Neil Cavuto; Hannity and Colmes is co-hosted by a Republican and a Democrat).

If you do watch Fox News, I recommend the O'Reilly Factor. It might be somewhat right-wing in nature, but there are some surprises to be found in Bill O'Reilly's views.

Reply

(The comment has been removed)

izuko January 14 2004, 19:41:38 UTC
That's one of the biggest reasons I can't stand commentators like Al Franken or Michael Moore... They seem to be of the opinion that a liberal isn't being effective unless he's screaming his head off and accusing conservatives of being Nazis. What the either fail or refuse to understand is that Allen Colmes has made me seriously consider the left's viewpoint, whereas the rabid liberals have never made me done so.

If Colmes is getting run over by Hannity (who, I'll admit can be rather aggressive at times), then they should consider that as a national strategy, since it works far better than what Franken and Moore are doing.

Likewise for Miss Coultier and Miss Ingram, for the right-wing side. I get much more good info from G. Gordon Liddy, Michael Reagan, and Ken Hambilin than I ever have from the firey-mouthed ladies.

It's just a shame Brother Ken isn't broadcasting anymore.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up