|
poo poo is getting political. In addition to killing time by playing video games, which news outlets I should subscribe to? I live in Finland, where the state sponsored Yle is an okay news source. I read Al Jazeera when it comes to middle east stuff. I have no loving idea these days what's really going on in the US, but I'd be up for financially supporting free press over there. Where can a layman idiot enter their credit card numbers to get good news and support free journalism?
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2018 15:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 3, 2024 22:35 |
|
|
GBS
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2018 16:18
|
|
|
if you're paying for US journalism for some reason, then i guess you'd be paying for the ones whose editorial line with which you most agree, since "news" is a commodity in our economy to be monetized and traded, and not a public good for society. which is kind of our entire problem. oh well, we only have have the 4,000 nuclear weapons. what's the worst that can happen.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2018 19:42
|
|
|
Vox Dot Com, for the party line of the mainstream of the American center-center-left who were born after 1980. The Atlantic magazine for their baby boomer counterparts
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2018 09:21
|
|
|
Personally, I only trust the stuff I read from the entrails of sacrificed sheep. I used to support the signs divined from the cast bones of my ancestors, but I've soured on them ever since they've been bought out by Rupert Murdoch.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2018 11:25
|
|
|
American media is real bad these days. I read the Times obsessively for years and watched in horror as it slowly turned into dogshit, animorphs style. I still pay for a subscription, but they don't really deserve your money and neither do any of the major American papers (WaPo, lmao.) Sure they publish the occasional muckraking investigative piece, but you have to carefully pick that out of the poop. If you just want the facts, ma’am, AP or Reuters. Not a subscription thing, but ad supported, so just read. The New York Review of Books publishes tremendous longform pieces, if you want an outlet to throw money at I can't think of a better one, especially since its reader base is aging. It's a wonderful way to be exposed to journalism, books, art, history, literature, philosophy, film, classical music, and what-have-you. If you want views, you have few decent American options, imo. The problem is that the American Overton window is so small that almost all mainstream writers are a complete snore and have predictably dense opinions. Matt Taibbi’s pieces rule and so do his books. The Baffler is good but they have sort of a college-leftist disposition, which means that even when they're right they're often wrong. People on here will probably tend to like it more than I do. I think Alexandra Petri's satire is a treasure, and she's certainly the only WaPo writer worth your time, but not everyone will like her style or find her funny. NYT can still be decent sometimes if you can tolerate the constant smell of rear end, they do deserve credit for trying to find new and compelling ways to tell stories. Mark Leibovich does exceptional work chronicling Washington the way it really is, he's almost worth the sub on his own. The New Yorker has good longform stuff occasionally (not to be confused with New York Magazine, which is a steaming turd.) As products of that city, they are naturally priggish and status-obsessed, and editorially pearl-clutching. Most of the lefty places like The Huffington Post and Daily Kos are extra awful. I guess Mother Jones and The Intercept are fine? Lately I've gained a bit of respect for ThinkProgress for their EPA/environment coverage, even though it's associated with CAP, a center-left think tank run by some of Washington's worst. I like Al Jazeera. KOTEX GOD OF BLOOD fucked around with this message at 18:14 on Jul 1, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2018 12:38
|
|
|
Mother Jones and ThinkProgress, also the American Prospect, are basically the loyal opposition to the Clinton wing of the Democratic Party and as such are the most virulently hostile to the extra-Democratic-Party movement left of anyone. They exist to draw a red line that nobody may go further left than, and ruthlessly enforce that line
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2018 04:05
|
|
|
radio war nerd
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2018 04:28
|
|
|
If you want to support dissent in radio or podcasts I can't recommend This Is Hell enough. The Center for Investigative Reporting has good stories. I get most of my news from podcasts these days anyways. Thank you for supporting investigative journalism; it's more important than ever, in my opinion.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2018 04:44
|
|
|
pat_b posted:The Center for Investigative Reporting has good stories.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2018 07:02
|
|
|
Pro muthafuckin Publica
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2018 08:54
|
|
|
You shouldn't read any news sources uncritically, including the ones that are good.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2018 10:53
|
|
|
gucci bane posted:You shouldn't read any news sources
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2018 14:35
|
|
|
I'd recommend The New York Times and The Washington Post for news about the United States. The papers' reporting about the government and other national issues are among the best in the country. Make sure you avoid the editorial sections. Many people think Editorial and News are the same and influence converge for one another. That is a myth. Both are separate and should be treated as such.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2018 07:22
|
|
|
If you're interested in politics and want to keep up with inside-the-Beltway baseball, Taegan Goddard's Political Wire isn't bad. Roll Call has good Congress coverage. Avoid POLITICO and The Hill.Catacombs posted:I'd recommend The New York Times and The Washington Post for news about the United States. The papers' reporting about the government and other national issues are among the best in the country. Don't forget that Chris Cillizza is a WaPo product and they continue his dumb dogshit via The Fix. KOTEX GOD OF BLOOD fucked around with this message at 20:28 on Jul 5, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2018 20:21
|
|
|
KOTEX GOD OF BLOOD posted:I think NYT and WaPo do report well on the federal government, particularly executive branch agencies. But their coverage of politics and national issues can be pretty awful. It's incredible how adept they are at missing the point entirely, time after time. They are the prime proponents of the false-objectivity crap that leads to coverage fundamentally at odds with reality and an unwillingness to report facts as they are.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2018 20:31
|
|
|
The problem with America is that you have, beyond cultural battles, people who are comfortable and people who are not; with those who are not being far more prone to anger and reactionary opinion. I’m going to focus mostly on the former, since the latter is part of what got us into our current mess. Going with journalism that is publicly funded and could use your support, NPR is the voice of the comfortable left. In some ways, the news organizer “WTF Just Happened Today” is a pretty good collection of trusted stories. I know some people like Democracy Now, which would be the more activist voice of public media for many years; but it’s dry nature and weird hybrid of real news with features on protest or activism raised to high prominence has created a space for leftist blogs and podcasts that aren’t so focused on street action. On the US right, I mean, you’ve surely seen what happened there. WSJ is the most responsible outlet that has a conservative editorial bent, Fox is completely sensationalist and changes rhetoric depending on the face that’s hosting it, and the angrier more reactionary voices are white nationalist trash sites. Finally, keep in mind we’re very bad about keeping ourselves in check. Americans have a dedication to their country that was designed to mimic the dedication of the dictatorships and empires it goes to war with. It’s a free country ostensibly, but peer pressure of being unpatriotic leads to a lot of blind spots in how the government handles things. So with that in mind, I tend to look at foreign news agencies and how they cover the US to make sure I’m simply seeing the world through the inside of our bubble.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2018 20:43
|
|
|
Catacombs posted:I'd recommend The New York Times and The Washington Post for news about the United States. The papers' reporting about the government and other national issues are among the best in the country. It's not so much that I think they're editorial department influences their news department, I'm just sick of how loving stupid their editorial department is and I don't want to support it, regardless of the quality of the news reporting.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2018 21:00
|
|
|
Dreylad posted:radio war nerd Radio war nerd is really good. The Intercept is pretty good as well. Bloomberg is generally pretty good, but you know whose side they're on. I mostly use twitter lists to follow specific journos and online stuff these days.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2018 21:31
|
|
|
All corporate media sources are stenographers for power. I recommend the black agenda report, current affairs, the baffler, etc. for news and analysis.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2018 23:41
|
|
|
I get my news exclusively from Chapo Trap House. In all seriousness I am glad to see this thread. There are a lot of lovely news sources out there and it is hard to know who to trust.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2018 00:10
|
|
|
PT6A posted:It's not so much that I think they're editorial department influences their news department, I'm just sick of how loving stupid their editorial department is and I don't want to support it, regardless of the quality of the news reporting. The thing about sources like WaPo or NYT is that you have to constantly keep in mind that they're basically he voice of those with power and will generally support the "bipartisan consensus" on things. They can still be useful as long as you always keep this in mind. That applies to all media to an extent, but it's especially important to always keep in mind that sources that like to sell themselves as relatively "unbiased" or "objective" are anything but. I think many liberals see the blatant lies of right wing media and become blind to the fact that there are other ways to mislead. The favored method of more liberal-leaning media (like NPR or WaPo or whatever) is generally to selectively choose which facts to report and emphasize, or to use a different tone when reporting on certain things. So they end up painting a certain picture of what the acceptable/"serious" range of opinions is and drawing your attention to certain things, without necessarily using a single lie. Of course, objectivity is impossible to begin with, but I feel like it's exceptionally misleading when an outlet isn't up-front with its ideological slant. As a side note, one thing I think people should always keep an eye out for, particularly when listening to the sort of liberal-aligned media I mentioned, is reports that highlight problems but never actually demand any specific solution to those problems (either by just saying "this is sure a problem!" or "we need to research this more"). A very common strategy used by media with this ideological bent is to acknowledge problems, but perpetually come up with excuses to put off actual change. It's a pro-status quo viewpoint masked as being progressive (since it's easy to mistakenly infer that acknowledging a problem means you want to fix it). This episode of Citations Needed discusses this some: https://soundcloud.com/citationsneeded/episode-16-editorial-boards-protectors-of-establishment-ideology (The reason why I mention liberal-aligned media so much is that it's the only mainstream media that isn't inherently a joke, so I think it's important that people both learn to acknowledge its flaws so they can ideally demand that it become better.)
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2018 05:09
|
|
|
If you want actual news and not just cathartic hot takes you know you'll agree with, I think the Christian Science Monitor is (weirdly) one of the best sources for reporting that earnestly aspires to be objective and unbiased. They're not actually affiliated with the religion, they're a nonprofit, and they have a mandate to avoid sensationalism. Because of these things, they also report on a lot of non-Trump-related events, which is kind of nice since no one else seems to. I know there's a big argument to be had about ideology and how there's no such thing as an objective or unbiased source, but in a US context at least I'd hold them up as relatively objective as you could expect.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2018 13:22
|
|
|
Black Agenda Report
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2018 13:35
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:As a side note, one thing I think people should always keep an eye out for, particularly when listening to the sort of liberal-aligned media I mentioned, is reports that highlight problems but never actually demand any specific solution to those problems (either by just saying "this is sure a problem!" or "we need to research this more"). A very common strategy used by media with this ideological bent is to acknowledge problems, but perpetually come up with excuses to put off actual change. It's a pro-status quo viewpoint masked as being progressive (since it's easy to mistakenly infer that acknowledging a problem means you want to fix it). This episode of Citations Needed discusses this some: https://soundcloud.com/citationsneeded/episode-16-editorial-boards-protectors-of-establishment-ideology This is really good, I particularly enjoyed how they highlighted the Washington Post being smug as gently caress about "How could anyone possibly seriously argue that there aren't WMDs in Iraq" in 2003. It's a great breakdown of the entire problem with Very Serious Thinking and being the smart adults in the room and all that nonsense.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2018 13:53
|
|
|
For headline/breaking news sorta stuff: BBC- Great worldwide reporting, don't expect much depth though. WaPo- I got rid of my subscription. Sometimes good stuff, but its mostly an Establishment paper and not that interesting. Al Jazeera- Alternative view. But given the political situation in Qatar, they've got a strong bias against the Saudis and others in their region. Really good reporting in Africa and Indian Ocean countries, including some long form stuff. Breitbart- To see what the alt-right is thinking. Over the past 6 months its gone significantly downhill, which is amazing considering how bad they were to start. Its a tabloid, with no attempt at serious journalism. Avoid it, obviously. Guardian- Kinda alternative but not really anymore? Haaretz- The next time serious poo poo goes down regarding Israel I'll get a subscription. Probably the best paper in the region. Longer form, analysis, and stuff: The Economist- I've had a sub for some time and quite enjoy it. It is the paper of the global capital elite. That being said they have great analysis over the entire world. They're self aware in the way a lot of papers are not, and seem to make a genuine effort to understand issues instead of just towing a line. In the issue I just read they had a multi page section entitled Marx Was Right, and pointed out the global capitalism is destroying itself. I'd say give it a try. The Intercept- People give Greenwald a lot of poo poo, which is fine. But this paper includes a bunch of different writers, and the editorial line includes stuff that goes against Greenwald. Decent anti-Establishment stuff. Al-Monitor- Middle East analysis, consistently and surprisingly good. Still trying to figure out what their angle is. Der Speigel- I used to read some of their english articles but haven't in a while. I added Politico to my list of daily checks a week or two ago, but it has yet to impress me. I'd really like to read a paper based in East Asia somewhere, but haven't found a decent one yet. edit: Ytlaya and others touched on this, but it isn't so much about what you read, as how you read it. My nightmare would be to read a paper and find myself nodding in agreement at everything. Agreeing makes it hard to think critically; I fear confirmation bias. Almost every source of news tells the truth. Bring up a random story on Fox or whatever and the facts they report are very probably correct. The bias comes from how these facts are presented, in their tone, in how they're emphasized or suppressed, and in what conclusions are drawn from them. And which are simply never reported in the first place. Read some stuff you don't agree with, see how they manipulate things. Then check out the stuff you do agree with, and look for the same tricks. Don't avoid facts because they hurt your arguments-- this is the path of the fanatic. Count Roland fucked around with this message at 14:58 on Jul 6, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2018 14:50
|
|
|
It's been about 3 years since the last time a thread like this has surfaced... things have changed a bit. I mostly just get my news from PPJ
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2018 15:23
|
|
|
BlueBlazer posted:It's been about 3 years since the last time a thread like this has surfaced... they really have not
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2018 18:36
|
|
|
Der spiegel will water down their english translated articles. For example, their piece on camp Parris calls marine recruits “murderers” in training but called them “warriors” in the English translation.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2018 18:36
|
|
|
The Washington Post for me has been really, really good. Not only great journalists in general but comprehensive reporting.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2018 18:53
|
|
|
Count Roland posted:Almost every source of news tells the truth. Bring up a random story on Fox or whatever and the facts they report are very probably correct. The bias comes from how these facts are presented, in their tone, in how they're emphasized or suppressed, and in what conclusions are drawn from them. And which are simply never reported in the first place. Read some stuff you don't agree with, see how they manipulate things. Then check out the stuff you do agree with, and look for the same tricks. Don't avoid facts because they hurt your arguments-- this is the path of the fanatic. I mostly agree with you (even Fox doesn't just state falsehoods outright in news articles) but it's important to keep in mind that Fox is run by racists and therefore has to have at least half a dozen "minorities behaving badly" stories on the front page. Actually if you're gonna pay attention to Fox you should probably just watch (as much) Fox and Friends (as you can handle). It's propaganda, but it's primarily propaganda FOR Trump (not 'propaganda in support of Trump' but 'propaganda directed at our idiot president who gets all his information about the world from a morning talk show'). It's hard to get through but it also gives you a window into the world as Trump perceives it, which is kind of useful for guessing as to what he might do. 90% of his insane tweets are just lazy rephrases of something one of the blowhard hosts on F&F says.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2018 23:49
|
|
|
Gnumonic posted:I mostly agree with you (even Fox doesn't just state falsehoods outright in news articles) but it's important to keep in mind that Fox is run by racists and therefore has to have at least half a dozen "minorities behaving badly" stories on the front page. Yes, but this is part of the exercise. Those stories of minorities killing or raping or whatever are probably true, if maybe embellished. But that's the point. If you devote half your paper to listing violent crimes committed by minorities, its super biased propaganda even if all the facts are true. Its tempting to say that Fox news or reporting of this stuff is lies, but its probably more productive to make counter-points-- say, that ok sure there's violent crime but the overall rate of violent crime has been steadily decreasing since the early 90s. Which is something that's also true but that Fox is obviously not to report on because it doesn't fit the conservative Tough on Crime line. quote:Actually if you're gonna pay attention to Fox you should probably just watch (as much) Fox and Friends (as you can handle). It's propaganda, but it's primarily propaganda FOR Trump (not 'propaganda in support of Trump' but 'propaganda directed at our idiot president who gets all his information about the world from a morning talk show'). It's hard to get through but it also gives you a window into the world as Trump perceives it, which is kind of useful for guessing as to what he might do. 90% of his insane tweets are just lazy rephrases of something one of the blowhard hosts on F&F says. I agree and I've tried but it is very, very hard. Probably 85% of my info consumption comes from reading, the remaining 15 from audio. Talking heads I've always found irritating and sensationalizing, and Fox and Friends adds a whole level of sickly sentimentality, childish simplicity and outright fawning of authority I find completely intolerable.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2018 02:28
|
|
|
On the topic of focusing on what’s important, please read news about Africa, you owe it to yourself. Africanews.com is a good place to do that, they run relevant stuff from AFP/AP/Reuters with some original reporting mixed in.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2018 16:16
|
|
|
Vox and Buzzfeed News are both free but imo they're good. People talk a lot of poo poo about Buzzfeed because listicles or whatever, but if they need clickbait about which Pixar protagonist you are to subsidize the reporting they're doing that's fine with me. I especially like their weekly news podcast, but that's just because I enjoy hearing the news from people under the age of 35.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2018 16:34
|
|
|
Vox is dogshit. Buzzfeed News isn’t bad at all since a few years ago when they suddenly decided to hire a bunch of quality reporters to write their stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2018 16:37
|
|
|
Honestly if you’re going to watch any Fox at all, Shepard Smith is the only one keeping his brain. He’s been around the network too long to fall in line to kissing Trump’s rear end, and so he’s as flabbergasted as most journalists are when the administration begins siding up with dictators against allies or whatever else Trump does that endangers trust in the Republic. There’s less MSNBC style outrage and more “oh god this guy Jesus I need a drink” attitude. Like you can hear Shep verbally rolling his eyes when Trump disputes facts yet again. Craptacular! fucked around with this message at 22:19 on Jul 7, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2018 22:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 3, 2024 22:35 |
|
|
Just because Smith is marginally better than other Fox News hosts doesn't mean watching the network is ever acceptable.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2018 23:19
|
|