Credible News Sources

[Bootstrap]

The list Jazz pointed to is about "fake news". They also have a list for breaking news:

[Robert]

And don't trust any of the ones that Wikileaks revealed were colluding with the DNC.

[ken_sylvania]

And don't trust any of the ones that Wikileaks revealed were colluding with the DNC.

Better yet don't trust any news outlet that has ever hired a journalist who abused his/her trust. ~s

[temporal1]

There's a soap box for a lot of this stuff -
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=94

maybe time to put on high boots, it's getting deep in here.

[Bootstrap]

And don't trust any of the ones that Wikileaks revealed were colluding with the DNC.

Better yet don't trust any news outlet that has ever hired a journalist who abused his/her trust. ~s

That would mean not trusting any news outlet. Which is appropriate - you shouldn't believe a story simply because you like the news outlet that published it. That's why you need the kinds of lists Jazz and I just pointed to, you need to learn how to look at a story and understand whether they have good evidence for the claims they are making.

Name your favorite news outlet, I bet I can find some dirt on it that's pretty concerning. But facts really do exist, and the better news organizations make it easy to understand the facts behind a story.

[temporal1]

This thread, Page 2 -

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.

Now, with MN's hearts/likes, we can "like" statements, while avoiding repetition!

[Bootstrap]

maybe time to put on high boots, it's getting deep in here.

Which things do you disagree with, and why? Do you agree with or disagree with the two News Consumer's Handbook list? Are there some items on the lists you like? Are there others you disagree with? Why?

You have told us you believe that critical thinking is an essential skill for people to learn, so let's talk through the details and the facts. That's what critical thinking is all about, not just dismissing what someone else says if you don't like it.

[temporal1]

In this thread, i'm primarily interested in Signtist's "positive spin" OP.
YMMV.

[Josh]

In this thread, i'm primarily interested in Signtist's "positive spin" OP.
YMMV.

I think it's disruptive and passive-aggressive to say we're primarily interested in one particular person. It's a nice way to say that we aren't interested in what other certain people have to say. I don't think that leads to healthy or open discussion.

[temporal1]

In this thread, i'm primarily interested in Signtist's "positive spin" OP.
YMMV.

I think it's disruptive and passive-aggressive to say we're primarily interested in one particular person. It's a nice way to say that we aren't interested in what other certain people have to say. I don't think that leads to healthy or open discussion.

Sorry. Disagree.
respecting OP's is a constant theme on MD-MN.
in fact, it's one i had to learn about when i first joined!

i was new to forums, had no idea how they worked, was constantly bunny-trailing topics, not knowing what i was doing. so. learning i was a pest, i try to do better.

frivolous accusations of "passive-aggressive" are: slimy.
btw, that is not PA, but, quite direct!