Actual fair and balanced coverage

[DarklordKyo]

I need to start watching the news, but I keep on hearing about so-called "journalists" that would rather stay as biased as possible rather than report what's actually happening (with those same people still keeping their jobs for some reason). Granted, it's primarily Fox, but I'd heard some accounts of it happening it in CNN, MSNBC, etc. I'd like to ask if anyone would like to throw in their two cents when it comes to who they believe is, objectively, the most reputable (or, at the very least, least biased) news station out there.

 

[Aris Khandr]

Probably the BBC. Al Jazeera also tends to be pretty good. Don't bother with an American news station.

 

[BOOM headshot65]

I need to start watching the news, but I keep on hearing about so-called "journalists" that would rather stay as biased as possible rather than report what's actually happening (with those same people still keeping their jobs for some reason). Granted, it's primarily Fox, but I'd heard some accounts of it happening it in CNN, MSNBC, etc. I'd like to ask if anyone would like to throw in their two cents when it comes to who they believe is, objectively, the most reputable (or, at the very least, least biased) news station out there.

Ill just save you the trouble and tell you it now: There is no such thing. I may be Republican, and I may watch Fox, but I would be not just a liar, but a damned liar (and yes, that is worse than just a liar) to say they live up to thier slogan. And its just as bad on the other stationss, especially when it comes to covering the military.

Personally, I have a rule to solve this: Never trust one source. I watch as many sources as I can get, and read newspapers as well. My usual, for giving the most accurate possible info:

1) Fox News (not exactly accurate, but the only major network giving the Republican view, and I have found them to be more trust worthy on military and war)
2) CNN
3) CBS
4) NBC (and local affiliate, Channel 13)
5) TIME Magazine
6) USA Today (newspaper)
7) The Mercury (local paper)
8) The Riley County Free Press (local paper, and another Republican Source)

With all those combined, I have little problem sorting out the bull from the fact.

 

[triggrhappy94]

I like the Rachel Maddow Show on MSNBC (it streams on the show's blog too).
It may be more left-leaning than others, but it's probably the least alarmist thing I've seen.
She'll normally give these crazy detailed back stories to the top stories for each shows which is really interesting.
She'll also normally end each episode with a little quirky story, like how a Turkish game show (while all other Turkish media is being censored) hid revolution-related words in each clue.
It's much more trustworthy than other channels
If anything, it'll make a really good compliment to other sources.


On a different note:
If you don't mind getting news from a non-American source, the BBC should work. From what I've heard, TV news isn't suppose to have a political bias over there--their newspapers get very cut-throat, though.

There's some online ones too that'll work (I can't vouch for these personally):
Reuters
Huffington Post
Salon
(For business)
Market Watch
Bloomberg
(For Polls and statistics)
Public Policy Polling
Galup

There's always sites like NBC, MSN, Yahoo, etc. I don't go to them for politics, regardless, but their articles on random crap tend to be pretty good. I love reading the comments for them too; there's always one or two completely unrelated and super racist comments.

I think the Associated Press is pretty non-bias too. You can find their stuff all over the place--they're syndicated everywhere.
The Daily Show and Colbert Report actually tend to be pretty good news sources too.
Time Magazine has a good blend of stuff. Their cover stories tend to be pretty good-- however, they sometimes get changed to fit American audiences, which is disappointing.
I'm also a fan of HBO's Vice and Real Time with Bill Maher--if you have HBO.
60 Minutes is also trustworthy, but not a day-to-day source.

In general I'd stay away from the Drudge Report and Fox News. They are heavily influenced by right-wing politics. You can pay attention to them if you want, but please know that they report a lot of right-wing conspiracy theories in addition to a right-wing opinion.

It'd say the same about most blogs. You can find a lot of small stories no one else is reporting on through blogs, but you can also get a lot theories and spin. You can comb the internet to find the good ones if you want, but you're just as likely to find the racist, neo-Nazi stuff too.

I don't listen to radio news so I couldn't tell you about that. What I said about Fox News and Drudge Report goes for Rush Limbaugh too.

There's a lot of different kind of news out there.

 

[Daystar Clarion]

Your mistake was watching an American news station.

Dat shit is bad for you, yo!


The most impartial news station I've seen is the BBC.

Hell, even when it's the BBC that's under scrutiny, they still report on it, with as little bias as possible.

 

[The Wykydtron]

Yeah BBC represent! I'm glad Fox and the like is just this little speck over the Pond that we can occasionally look up and laugh at. God forbid I actually had to watch it seriously...

The newspapers can be bad but really, the general British public has caught on that at least The Sun is literally "Shit Stirring: The Paper" and anything they say has to be taken with a bag of salt and preferably laughed at. It's the Mirror you have to be careful of...

Top three stories every week or so:

1. Something about WW2 because we were absolute badass in that war

2. DIANA! SHE WAS THE PEOPLE'S PRINCESS T_T

3. X scientifically proven to give you cancer/eternal life

Well they're running out of Diana news for obvious reasons but they will slap her face on the front cover at every possible opportunity.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

Being in Argentina, obviously we don't get BBC. But I hear it's very good.

 

[The Lugz]

Your mistake was watching an American news station.

Dat shit is bad for you, yo!


The most impartial news station I've seen is the BBC.

Hell, even when it's the BBC that's under scrutiny, they still report on it, with as little bias as possible.

got to agree, the bbc sets off the fewest alarms for me too.. but i'm not saying they're completely unbiased
i honestly don't think such a thing could exist.

probably best taking a few sources and trying to filter out the bias yourself is the best bet.

just try and figure out who's bias to what and work it backwards.

 

[Ed130 The Vanguard]

I would also say the BBC are your best bet.

When both sides of the conflict are declaring the company biased towards the other side you know they are doing something right.

 

[Lawyer105]

BBC's just as biased as the American news services, in it's own way. It's just a little more subtle about it. Where the American stations can and will straight-up fabricate stuff (or outright omit pertinent details, as appropriate), the BBC will simply... slant. In many ways, that's worse than outright lying. Basic fact checking will catch the media out if they lie. Slanting the news is far harder to catch and far more insidious.

Face it. Like the politicians, the media is bought and paid for. They report the news they're told to report and ignore the stuff that doesn't serve the corporate interests. "Independent" is just a label they like to stick on themselves to pretend that they're better than the competition.

 

[piinyouri]

I have always heard good (as good as you can hope for anyway) things about BBC, and a handful of others seem to back that up, so I'll say BBC.

I'm American, and will openly admit that American news is a hair away from outright propaganda.

 

[Daystar Clarion]

BBC's just as biased as the American news services, in it's own way. It's just a little more subtle about it. Where the American stations can and will straight-up fabricate stuff (or outright omit pertinent details, as appropriate), the BBC will simply... slant. In many ways, that's worse than outright lying. Basic fact checking will catch the media out if they lie. Slanting the news is far harder to catch and far more insidious.

Face it. Like the politicians, the media is bought and paid for. They report the news they're told to report and ignore the stuff that doesn't serve the corporate interests. "Independent" is just a label they like to stick on themselves to pretend that they're better than the competition.

Please, do tell.

This should be fun :3

 

[Yopaz]

It's impossible to be completely objective unless you're simply saying what happened and nothing more. Some sources are better at presenting things objectively, but when reporting things we also have to interpret it and then we're using our knowledge and experience.

 

[WarpZone]

Here, check this out: http://www.rogerdarlington.me.uk/thinking.html

I don't even watch news on the TV anymore. There's no point. Even if they somehow manage to avoid bias, they're just repeating stuff they read on blogs anyway. Half the time they don't even bother to vet it, such is the importance of reporting it before the other guy does.

So instead, I just get my news from the internet. If there's something I need to know more about, I'll google it. Then I pick through the results and read 2 or 3 of them that seem vaguely legit. If an article I'm reading seems obviously biased, I'll click back and choose a different one.

Sometimes I'll favor a specific source or group of sources depending on the type of news I need to know. Slashdot for technology news, for example. But I can't tell you which sources are right for you. You need to decide for yourself. Get out there, read some sites, and think critically about what the authors' possible biases might be and to what extent those biases might result in you getting bad info from them.

You can't just ask someone else "what's the least biased news source?" When you do that, you're giving whomever you asked full control. It defeats the purpose of avoiding bias in the first place-- the person you asked BECOMES the bias. For more information, see the link about critical thinking at the top of this post.

 

[drthmik]

I find it interesting that you are asking for a citation on someone else's opinion when You provided none for your own

There is also bias in the decision of WHICH stories to tell not just in how they're told

 

[Daystar Clarion]

I find it interesting that you are asking for a citation on someone else's opinion when You provided none for your own

Burden of proof lies on the person making the accusation.

 

[drthmik]

Your mistake was watching an American news station.

Dat shit is bad for you, yo!

Sounds like an accusation to me

 

[Lady Lucky]

BBC is the least biased, in my opinion Al jeezera tends to be a little bit hard on western civilization. Don't get me wrong though, Al jeezera is really good, I'd take them over Fox and CNN any day at any time.

 

[Daystar Clarion]

Your mistake was watching an American news station.

Dat shit is bad for you, yo!

Sounds like an accusation to me

I'm pretty sure most people know how politically orientated US news broadcasters are :3

It's practically common knowledge.

 

[Calcium]

Personally I tend to watch the BBC and Al Jazeera. Have just gotten into watching the latter... though it gives the impression of giving more views than that of the BBC, which is rather impressive. At any rate, there's less emphasis on the UK, meaning more stories I want to hear about rather than UK murder trials and such which I don't really have an interest in.