Credible News Sources

[Bootstrap]

I have concluded that the best one can do at this point is get as broad a view point as possible. Always try hard to find where a writer's bias is because there always is one and then read it or watch it in that light.

And finally. Recognize that while we live in this world and so to a certain extent we must know what is happening around us in order to function: in the end they (the world) can not touch us in the areas that really matter. Providing of course that we keep our primary focus on the King of Kings.

I definitely agree with what I quoted here.

What news resources do you recommend? I agree that comparing multiple sources to get a broad viewpoint is good, and that you need to read beyond what they write to get to the facts. To me, it's helpful to focus on news sources that make it easy to verify the facts they claim. Print newspapers, fact checking sites, specialized journals like foreignpolicy.com and fivethirtyeight.com, etc. work a lot better for that than TV and cable news.

[appleman2006]

The problem is that even fact checking sites can get it wrong at times. Even they usually have a bias.

Generally I would recommend at the very least verifying major news stories with at least two sources. One that leans to the right and one to the left. Here in Canada that is very hard to do as we have very little left on the right side. Particularly in print. On radio I would say we have a bit more choice.

But I do not consider news to be the primary problem even though even news articles have become very biased at times. It is the vast amount of opinion pieces as well as the talk radio and talk TV sites that are the issue IMO. And if you are getting most of your news through these mediums which I fear too many people are, than I feel you may want to take a good look at how your opinions are being based,
I have no problem with reading and watching these pieces but always read them with a critical thought. Ask yourself? Does this make sense? Does it add up and does it compare to other facts that you know to be true?

When I am watching, listening to or reading these pieces even when it is a source I have learned to trust, I am constantly asking questions in my mind. In a sense I am having a virtual debate going on inside my head. At times ideas are laughingly easy to dismiss since I have all kinds of logic and facts at my disposal to write them off. At other times something that does not line up with my opinion is not nearly as easy to ignore. I am than forced to either rethink my opinion or do some more research.

Critical thinking is an important part of every avenue of life but I would say it is a very important part of our news intake.

[temporal1]

The problem is that even fact checking sites can get it wrong at times.
Even they usually have a bias.

Generally I would recommend at the very least verifying major news stories with at least two sources. One that leans to the right and one to the left. Here in Canada that is very hard to do as we have very little left on the right side. Particularly in print. On radio I would say we have a bit more choice.

But I do not consider news to be the primary problem even though even news articles have become very biased at times.

It is the vast amount of opinion pieces as well as the talk radio and talk TV sites that are the issue IMO.

And if you are getting most of your news through these mediums which I fear too many people are, than I feel you may want to take a good look at how your opinions are being based,
I have no problem with reading and watching these pieces but always read them with a critical thought. Ask yourself? Does this make sense? Does it add up and does it compare to other facts that you know to be true?

When I am watching, listening to or reading these pieces even when it is a source I have learned to trust, I am constantly asking questions in my mind. In a sense I am having a virtual debate going on inside my head.

At times ideas are laughingly easy to dismiss since I have all kinds of logic and facts at my disposal to write them off. At other times something that does not line up with my opinion is not nearly as easy to ignore. I am than forced to either rethink my opinion or do some more research.

Critical thinking is an important part of every avenue of life but I would say it is a very important part of our news intake.

hi appleman,
i understand about not reading-through all the pages! ugh.
a lot of talk, very few names of "Credible News Sources," Signtist's single OP request.
(for me) Robert summed it up on Page 2 with this post:

The challenge is ALL facts can be interpreted.
We have so much data, that we all have to filter it some how. Those filters do bias that data.

One of the side effects of being in the information age.
So much data and such little wisdom.

Diamond.

By Page 9, i finally thought of one:

Signtist! i stumbled on a credible news source (i use) for weather conditions:
NOAA
http://www.nws.noaa.gov/nwr/Maps/index.php

NOAA
http://forecast.weather.gov/MapClick.ph ... Dx_wHROKhA

Beware of unapologetic, flashy, global warming bias.

By Page 12, i was thinking of taking a count of "Credible News Sources:"

i'd like to go back through this thread to count+list the actual names and numbers of
Credible News Sources (in 12 pages of posts!)
i came up with 1, NOAA, with conditions.

not sure if i will. i'm thinking of it, tho.
12 pages. ugh.

i would like to add to your list of "news opinions" that folks accept as "news," here in the U.S., and, likely in Canada? ..
entertainers/comedians doing "news report" style shows that became so popular, esp among young folks with little or no real life experience .. shows like SNL, Jon Stewart, The Colbert Report, etc.

i'm seeing very little of any news presently, but, these programs have caused "disturbances" in the mainstream, the for-profit news industry noticing young people were/are choosing to get their news through these entertainers, rather than through them -

from my pov, the lines between "news" and "entertainment" have become so blurred, they are too often indistinguishable. it's all extremely profitable, and, it's all about profits.

no longer either news or entertainment, but a biased hybrid of the two.

your thoughts? (it seems, Signtist has .. departed!)

(many of U.S. entertainers and news people hail from Canada, i'm sure you know. i believe there is a Canadian liberal influence there, altho never stated.)

[Bootstrap]

When I am watching, listening to or reading these pieces even when it is a source I have learned to trust, I am constantly asking questions in my mind. In a sense I am having a virtual debate going on inside my head. At times ideas are laughingly easy to dismiss since I have all kinds of logic and facts at my disposal to write them off. At other times something that does not line up with my opinion is not nearly as easy to ignore. I am than forced to either rethink my opinion or do some more research.

Critical thinking is an important part of every avenue of life but I would say it is a very important part of our news intake.

Very well said.

Here's a useful measure: if you can only talk about the news using the same phrases that these sources use, you probably aren't thinking for yourself.

The problem is that even fact checking sites can get it wrong at times.
Even they usually have a bias.

Sure, but on "matters of fact", they tend to be better than other sources I know.

Generally I would recommend at the very least verifying major news stories with at least two sources. One that leans to the right and one to the left. Here in Canada that is very hard to do as we have very little left on the right side. Particularly in print. On radio I would say we have a bit more choice.

Yes, I agree.

[PeterG]

Excellent post, appleman.

I found this part particularly insightful—

But I do not consider news to be the primary problem even though even news articles have become very biased at times. It is the vast amount of opinion pieces as well as the talk radio and talk TV sites that are the issue IMO. And if you are getting most of your news through these mediums which I fear too many people are, than I feel you may want to take a good look at how your opinions are being based

[Robert]

[Robert]

http://www.theblaze.com/news/2016/12/09 ... -of-touch/

[temporal1]

http://www.theblaze.com/news/2016/12/09 ... -of-touch/

Gene is suggesting some new "job assignments" may be opening up in northern Canada;

perhaps, like FB, many employers need to consider hiring from a more mature field of job applicants to aid in their newly acquired interest in balanced news reporting ..

for instance, if one is 28 today, they've only experienced 1 sitting POTUS in their "adult" years
(21 being the typical legal definition of adult.) recent science is bringing new facts to that table.

i have a young friend in tv-radio news broadcasting, he grew up in a news family.
he once told me, "if only" the public knew how young+inexperienced news industry employees are, "it's a 20's thing," they would be shocked. i tend to believe him.

i was glad to see Bob Schieffer retire, tho.
starting counting his pundit days after Ford's death. (i found him) offensive, as he "presided."

i'd like to see "term limits" on news anchors.
presidents come+go, some of these anchors sit in their sanctimonious chairs, one president after another.

[appleman2006]

This would be hilarious if it had not proven to be so pathetically true. Particularly in the last year. The amazing thing is that many in the public saw through them.

[Josh]

Some Canadian sources of news I like are Ezra Levant, Mark Steyn, and the associated Rebel Media. It's biased but honest about its biases.