Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Examples: Monday, today, last week, Mar 26, 3/26/04
Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@newbuddhist.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take up to 48 hours. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.

trusted media sources

blu3reeblu3ree Veteran Veteran
edited July 2013 in General Banter
with mainstream media (the news on cable) repeating stories for a week straight and showing stuff that seems like very poor journalism (reading the telepromptor) ive began to take whats on the news with a grain of salt.

so where does everyone get their current events and news?

Comments

  • personperson Don't believe everything you think the void Veteran
    I've always found NPR to be a fair and thoughtful source for news.
    Linc
  • genkakugenkaku Veteran Northampton, Mass. U.S.A. Veteran
    I like the BBC, Reuters, Al Jazeera, The Guardian, and something called United Networks News. Frontline is my favorite TV journalism outlet, but it is not a daily. I used to like The Washington Post, but they have fallen into disarray in the face of the Internet challenge. The New York Times has a case of arrogance I don't care for.

    As the money has gotten tighter, the networks seem to have contracted a bad case of Botox and boom box... pretty and loud. I do like to listen to Marcia Coyle when she appears on NPR ... she is a person of substance, a person who both thinks and has done her homework.

    It is very hard to find a presentation that is more devoted to the story than it is to the person or organization presenting it.
    riverflow
  • federicafederica seeker of the clear blue sky Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubt Moderator
    'The Independent' newspaper in the UK, is pretty good and non-partisan.
    It has a condensed, 'easier-to-get-through' version, simply called 'i' which is also punchy and to-the-point.
    lobster
  • lobsterlobster Veteran Veteran
    They have 'News'?
    Always seems the same old same-old . . . :o
    BeejEvenThird
  • DaltheJigsawDaltheJigsaw Veteran Mountain View Veteran
    edited July 2013
    blu3ree said:

    with mainstream media (the news on cable) repeating stories for a week straight and showing stuff that seems like very poor journalism (reading the telepromptor) ive began to take whats on the news with a grain of salt.

    so where does everyone get their current events and news?

    I read visit a dozen of media sites and then use my common sense/logic to make my own decision.

    Some of the sites I visit: http://www.huffingtonpost.com - http://www.drudgereport.com - http://www.infowars.com - http://www.nytimes.com - http://www.news.google.com - http://www.news.yahoo.com.
  • DaltheJigsawDaltheJigsaw Veteran Mountain View Veteran
    person said:

    I've always found NPR to be a fair and thoughtful source for news.

    I really enjoy NPR! Most of the time their stuff is not biased. It depends who is reporting.
  • lamaramadingdonglamaramadingdong Veteran Veteran
    Second (or third) NPR.
  • DaozenDaozen Veteran Veteran
    I generally try to avoid "news" altogether.

    A few years ago I realised that most news is either crime reporting or advertising, due to the fact that lazy/underfunded journalists will be happy to regurgitate the easiest sources of information, which tends to be police reports (a nice grizzly murder always gets attention) or press releases from corporations seeking to promote themselves (and since those corporations often pay the media large sums to advertise their products, that media feels compelled to include these spin pieces as 'legitimate' news).

    On the psychological side, news is also deeply unhelpful. Reading a major paper or watching commercial TV news, you will basically get a distillation of the absolute worse things happening around the world, all thrown at you at once. What's more, almost all of these things are absolutely outside your control, so all you are left with is an overwhelming sense of misery about the world. It's not good.

    Please note, by news I mean short-form info-news. The headline-grabbing and space-filling stuff.

    So what's the alternative? Seek out "long-form" journalism. These are the articles that people take weeks or even months to put together. They tend to be more like essays than "news", although they will often discuss important current events.

    The Global Mail
    Matter
    The New Yorker
    The Economist

    Namaste
    riverflowFlorian
  • chanrattchanratt Veteran Veteran
    The Independent, NPR
  • karastikarasti Breathing Minnesota Moderator
    I take everything I read with a grain of salt because while some are obviously more biased than others, any time a person reports on something, it will usually be with some slant. But I listen to/read NPR/MPR several of the mainstream news sites, but I mostly just skim and don't worry too much about what they are saying, FARK (for the variety of things covered) and increasingly The Onion. Satire, yes, but their satire is more real than the regular media news is. And www.happynews.com because some days, the regular news is too much.

    Overall I try to limit my exposure to it. I don't feel a huge need to know everything that is happening in the world, the country, my state, or even my town. 99.9% of it doesn't directly affect me so why stress and worry myself with it? Not to mention I found that for me, it's a huge time suck. Why bother following the news of the crash of the airplane in San Fran? Most of the initial reports are wrong, anyhow, and the final word doesn't come out until days/weeks/months/years later. I found it sad how long it took for the US to pick up the story on the Quebec train crash. I have a friend who lives there, and when she told me about it it took a full 24 hours to even be mentioned here, and it was only really picked up when the news found out how many people had probably been "vaporized."

    Anyhow, I personally find I am actually far clearer in mind and less stressed when I avoid the news. In the morning I had a habit of turning on GMA and instead now I leave the tv off and meditate and/or read. It's a much better use of my limited time rather than listening about this murder trial, that celebrity headed to rehab, this boating disaster, that kid who can do something funny on youtube, and so on. When the Boston bombing happened, I sat glued to the tv for hours. And walked away with no more answers than I had when I started watching. All for what? So I stopped.
    Daozenriverflow
  • vinlynvinlyn Veteran Colorado...for now Veteran
    person said:

    I've always found NPR to be a fair and thoughtful source for news.

    I question how large a news-gathering organization they are. It seems to me they rely on other news-gathering organizations and specialize more on commentary.

  • personperson Don't believe everything you think the void Veteran
    vinlyn said:

    person said:

    I've always found NPR to be a fair and thoughtful source for news.

    I question how large a news-gathering organization they are. It seems to me they rely on other news-gathering organizations and specialize more on commentary.

    That's a good point and now that you state it I can see that its probably true.

    Still, the commentary on a news story is probably what is more important than the fact of reporting it except probably in the case of investigative journalism.
  • karastikarasti Breathing Minnesota Moderator
    I would agree, @vinlyn. When I watched the news more, it was maybe 90% commentary though. "A plane crash landed at San Fran airport" might be the only fact of the moment, and the other 3 hours worth is commentary, speculation, and so on. I find NPR's commentary to be far more based in reality and less-so based in speculation that most other sources. They don't get so caught up in reporting every statement made on twitter or user comments like cnn and the others do. When the plane crashed, a bunch of major news networks reported that the plane had flipped end over end, because someone on twitter said that is what it looked like. Thankfully NPR doesn't get it's news from twitter users.
  • rivercanerivercane Veteran Veteran
    I like rawstory.com.
  • vinlynvinlyn Veteran Colorado...for now Veteran
    I think where NPR excels is doing extended interviews.
  • BeejBeej Human Being Veteran
    edited July 2013
    i just wait for someone to tell me... in person. I know of only a few news stories from the past year, and these were the tragic events that overwhelmed American minds: Kindergarten shooting, Boston marathon bombings, and the Oklahoma Tornados. I really cant remember much else that happened in the public eye this year because i have all but completely stopped watching the news, except for the weather channel because i travel by bike or by bus so its good to know when to bring a change of socks. But i can tell you A LOT about what happened with me. I stopped worrying about all the stuff that doesnt directly effect me and became more aware of what actually does effect ME. This doesnt mean that i dont occasionaly seek out information, but its directly applicable to my life. If i need it, i will look for it. Which is why i am here on NB, right now. :)

    When i told my mom that i stopped watching the news and sports she asked in befuddled vexation, "Then what do you talk to people about?" lololololololol! hillarious. apparently things can only have signifigance if they.... ah... jeez... ya know what?...... nevermind. its not really news worthy.

    SO. VERY. LOL. :lol:
    Vastmindriverflow
  • CittaCitta Veteran Veteran
    edited July 2013
    genkaku said:

    I like the BBC, Reuters, Al Jazeera, The Guardian, and something called United Networks News. Frontline is my favorite TV journalism outlet, but it is not a daily. I used to like The Washington Post, but they have fallen into disarray in the face of the Internet challenge. The New York Times has a case of arrogance I don't care for.

    As the money has gotten tighter, the networks seem to have contracted a bad case of Botox and boom box... pretty and loud. I do like to listen to Marcia Coyle when she appears on NPR ... she is a person of substance, a person who both thinks and has done her homework.

    It is very hard to find a presentation that is more devoted to the story than it is to the person or organization presenting it.

    Believe me @genkaku its all relative. If you lived in the UK you would find many a thoughtful balanced person with lots of reasons to treat both the BBC's and the Guardian's output with wry detachment...
    I don't know if its available in the U.S. but for the real lowdown re Brit issues I recommend a fortnightly publication called ' Private Eye.'
  • CittaCitta Veteran Veteran
    Shortly after posting the above my eye fell on a piece by the ( Tory ) journalist Charles Moore during which he refers to the fact that the BBC's Economics Editor Stephanie Flanders dated both Ed Milliband and Ed Balls ( they are respectively, the Labour Party Prime Minister and Chancellor, in waiting..) when in her twenties. He says;
    " I am not suggesting for a moment that Miss Flanders deliberately targeted two rising Labour stars......or that they, looking for future favourable coverage, targeted Miss Flanders. All that I am saying is her choices were a good preparation for of a life of impartiality as the BBC understands it ".
    ;)
  • genkakugenkaku Veteran Northampton, Mass. U.S.A. Veteran
    edited July 2013
    Still, the commentary on a news story is probably what is more important than the fact of reporting it except probably in the case of investigative journalism.
    @person -- As I read this -- and I do hope I'm reading it wrong -- I assume it is saying that commentary is more important than the gathering and presenting of facts.

    If this is the case, no doubt the blogosphere and Facebook and Twitter and the derivative news services and a variety of religions will be dancing in the streets, but the rest of us are left significantly dumber and increasingly more irresponsible.

    Gathering facts first-hand is news. Gathering opinions gussied up as facts is gossip ... albeit sometimes very handsome and much-praised gossip.
  • vinlynvinlyn Veteran Colorado...for now Veteran
    genkaku said:

    Still, the commentary on a news story is probably what is more important than the fact of reporting it except probably in the case of investigative journalism.
    @person -- As I read this -- and I do hope I'm reading it wrong -- I assume it is saying that commentary is more important than the gathering and presenting of facts.

    If this is the case, no doubt the blogosphere and Facebook and Twitter and the derivative news services and a variety of religions will be dancing in the streets, but the rest of us are left significantly dumber and increasingly more irresponsible.

    Gathering facts first-hand is news. Gathering opinions gussied up as facts is gossip ... albeit sometimes very handsome and much-praised gossip.

    I think maybe you're going a little too far. I don't have time to read everything about -- for example -- the Snowden case. So I want some commentary to tell me what's important about it. There are too many significant issues out there for us all to know all the facts...we need help sifting through everything. That's the purpose of commentary.

  • genkakugenkaku Veteran Northampton, Mass. U.S.A. Veteran
    @vinlyn -- OK, I concede your point, but do so grudgingly in the face of what I see as a growing tendency to rely on commentary as gospel without first ascertaining the facts.

    Color me grouchy. :)
    vinlyn
  • personperson Don't believe everything you think the void Veteran
    genkaku said:

    Still, the commentary on a news story is probably what is more important than the fact of reporting it except probably in the case of investigative journalism.
    @person -- As I read this -- and I do hope I'm reading it wrong -- I assume it is saying that commentary is more important than the gathering and presenting of facts.

    If this is the case, no doubt the blogosphere and Facebook and Twitter and the derivative news services and a variety of religions will be dancing in the streets, but the rest of us are left significantly dumber and increasingly more irresponsible.

    Gathering facts first-hand is news. Gathering opinions gussied up as facts is gossip ... albeit sometimes very handsome and much-praised gossip.

    Well, the content of the commentary is pretty important. Interviewing a couple learned individuals is way different than scrolling a twitter feed.

    Certainly getting the facts out is important but I do really feel that putting those facts into context and understanding what they mean is where its at.

    But like I said, investigative journalism, that uncovers important facts that we didn't know about is important.

    In the end though of course both are important. The most insightful commentary about wrong information is pretty useless and two high school stoners talking about Syria won't get you much either (or FOX news for that matter.)
  • searching_samsarasearching_samsara Explorer Explorer
    Trusted Media
    An oxymoron
    WonderingSeeker
Sign In or Register to comment.