Author |
Topic Search Topic Options
|
Mikerinos
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Planet Gong
Status: Offline
Points: 8890
|
Posted: August 27 2006 at 17:33 |
I am as ignorant as possible regarding politics
Edited by Bluesaga - August 27 2006 at 17:33
|
|
|
Fusionman
Forum Groupie
Joined: July 27 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 86
|
Posted: August 27 2006 at 14:11 |
It depends on what kind of news you're talking about. If it's just things that are national CNN is definitely a trustable source. Generally they aren't bias and they give the facts as they know them with some interpretation that can be easily ignored.
When it comes to foreign affairs there is no news source that is really any better than any other...and that is not because they are using propaganda. It's because governments leak false information and keep so many things hushed that there's no real source for facts. So all they can do is see what they want to see (in a sense). That's why the same "Facts" on two different stations have different conclusions. If you want the REAL facts...give up.
Recently the NY Times printed an article that elaborately explained how the US Government was tracking terrorists through these off-shore bank accounts. These facts that got out compromised security; so there becomes the question. "How important is it really to know?" The government surely has no vendetta against its people and if you feel so YOU are actually the downfall...or will be the root cause. Every powerful government fails because the people don't trust it; even though through history it has always been proven that the government generally was falsely accused. Read history to get a good feel for todays problems...it does repeat itself as it is today.
Hell...go back as recently as Nixon. Nixon was basically innocent; his only crime was trying to not lose public faith. It was proven that he wasn't bugging anyone for reasons that he was accused for; but rather in an anti-terrorist unit. There was no knowledge of a Democrats headquarters...which AGAIN compromised security causing the terrorists to become knowledgable. You people out there think being in the know gives you power, but you never can find all the facts to actually build the true story. So what's the point in trying to find all the facts; when it only leads to false assumptions?
Edited by Fusionman - August 27 2006 at 14:15
|
|
|
maani
Special Collaborator
Founding Moderator
Joined: January 30 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2632
|
Posted: August 27 2006 at 13:40 |
Because I am an editor on a socio-political blog, I end up reading or viewing quite a variety of media sources. Since none of them is without its corporate-driven agenda (i.e., news as entertainment, news as political machine, etc.), one needs to "read between the lines" of any media outlet, and to get "both sides" - i.e., the "liberal" and "conservative" (as well as the middle) - of any story.
In this regard, I trust TV media least of all, though I will occasionally check CNN and BBC (and NY1 for local news). Online I check cnn.com, among others.
Of the printed media, I trust The New York Times as the most accurate "liberal" voice and the The New York Post (generally a truly despicable paper) as an accurate "conservative voice." As for FOX (TV, print, online), it is the neocon voice, so it is valuable if you want to know where the Bush-Cheney-Rove agenda is going.
I also read the generally conservative Foreign Affairs (the publication of the globalization-focused Council on Foreign Relations, and one of the most "intelligent" publications in the world, even if I disagree with it much of the time) and the generally liberal Harper's (another wonderfully "intelligent" publication). I also like Tikkun (a primarily Jewish magazine that has a solid handle on “spiritually progressive” issues regarding the confluence of religion - all faiths - and politics) and The Christian Science Monitor which, despite its name, is a very fair-minded, even-handed publication with some of the most solid reporting anywhere.
I also like some of the alternative news sources, both “real world” and Internet. Democracy Now is darn good (both TV and Web), as are Truthout and AlterNet. As a member of the 9/11 truth movement, I also monitor some of the better sites, including NY911truth and Prison Planet (one of Alex Jones’ sites).
Peace.
|
|
stonebeard
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 27 2005
Location: NE Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 28057
|
Posted: August 27 2006 at 13:02 |
I don't realy "trust" anything like that inherently, but I only ever check CNN and BBC and I wouldn't say I believe one perticular organization more than the other.
|
|
|
Raff
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: July 29 2005
Location: None
Status: Offline
Points: 24429
|
Posted: August 27 2006 at 12:59 |
crimson thing wrote:
Ghost Rider wrote:
Ok, I ticked "my own country's newspapers and websites", but the issue of trust is a delicate one indeed. As a matter of fact, I very rarely buy newspapers, though I regularly read the news (more than once a day too) on the website of one of the major Italian dailies, "La Repubblica" (which is rather left-wing, though by no means extremist). I can't say I trust it blindly, though, as news can be easily manipulated, especially in a rather delicate situation like that of Italy. |
....it certainly doesn't help when the Prime Minister (as was) owns so much of the media..... |
*feels severely sick at the very mention of the Poison Dwarf*
|
|
crimson thing
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 28 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 848
|
Posted: August 27 2006 at 12:56 |
Ghost Rider wrote:
Ok, I ticked "my own country's newspapers and websites", but the issue of trust is a delicate one indeed. As a matter of fact, I very rarely buy newspapers, though I regularly read the news (more than once a day too) on the website of one of the major Italian dailies, "La Repubblica" (which is rather left-wing, though by no means extremist). I can't say I trust it blindly, though, as news can be easily manipulated, especially in a rather delicate situation like that of Italy. |
....it certainly doesn't help when the Prime Minister (as was) owns so much of the media.....
|
"Every man over forty is a scoundrel." GBS
|
|
Asyte2c00
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 15 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2099
|
Posted: August 27 2006 at 12:22 |
Fox News, I would watch BBC news but dont get it where I live
|
|
Logos
Prog Reviewer
Joined: March 08 2005
Location: Finland
Status: Offline
Points: 2383
|
Posted: August 27 2006 at 12:21 |
Fox TV is in there, wtf?
|
|
Raff
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: July 29 2005
Location: None
Status: Offline
Points: 24429
|
Posted: August 27 2006 at 12:12 |
Ok, I ticked "my own country's newspapers and websites", but the issue of trust is a delicate one indeed. As a matter of fact, I very rarely buy newspapers, though I regularly read the news (more than once a day too) on the website of one of the major Italian dailies, "La Repubblica" (which is rather left-wing, though by no means extremist). I can't say I trust it blindly, though, as news can be easily manipulated, especially in a rather delicate situation like that of Italy.
|
|
crimson thing
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 28 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 848
|
Posted: August 27 2006 at 12:00 |
Which primary news sources do you guys generally trust (they all make mistakes sometimes) to keep you accurately informed on national & international affairs? And maybe you can name any you think are particularly full of sh+t....
(Apologies to non-UK & non-US peeps for the parochial choices - I had to limit the choices somehow .....and please don't all cynically tick "none of the above"......unless you really mean it...... )
|
"Every man over forty is a scoundrel." GBS
|
|
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.