I always struggle with what sources I should be reading for news (particularly political news). I don’t want to read only sources that I agree with, but I also struggle finding news sources that aren’t sensationalist and put forward varied view points. Here are a few of the places I frequent (criticism of these sources or other recommendations are welcome.) I don’t think my political news sources are well varied so any recommendations there would be great as well.
- hackernews
- arstechnica
- the economist
- axios
- MIT News
- Wired
My main news sources are primarily NY Times, npr and a local city paper.
It’s not a particularly varied list but I reached a point during the pandemic where I just couldn’t handle the firehose of low effort journalism doom and gloom anymore. Opted to choose a couple of quality, relatively neutral sources and cut out the reddit feed. Npr is left leaning in their content and nytimes feels slightly left leaning on their journalism pieces, but based on the political op-ed writeups on the front page that I rarely read it looks right leaning
Initially I paid for a nytimes subscription until I found that I could get a library card from a sort of nearby large city in my state through a statewide reciprocal library card program, at which point I found that better funded library offers a free subscription to the nytimes to any cardholder, so that’s how I get access now. I find their higher quality of journalism to be like a breath of fresh air after getting hot boxed every day from the low effort shit that reddit fed us
Here’s a good discussion on why you should vary your news sources along with some charts to show how sources vary and specific examples given. Maybe you can find what you’re looking for in there.
Keeping it limited to English language news sites:
-
teleSUR News from Venezuela, gives a very different perspective and reports many news from the global south, which are simply ignored in western media.
-
Ruptly If there are protests anywhere in the world, they will have videos.
-
Global Times From China, which will be the biggest economy in a few years. So even if you dont agree with them, its good to know what they are doing, and why.
So even if you dont agree with them
I mean, they’re a state run media, it’s a deceptive propaganda machine that honest people should find themselves disagreeing with, they’re only useful for knowing what the CCP is doing, and maybe getting a glimpse at why, but usually, the “why” is a lie.
I’d trust them as much as I trust Fox News to give me the truth.
Sounds to me like you made up your opinion without reading a single article of theirs.
I made up my opinion after they pushed a narrative in the face of reality time and time again. Like the endless “articles” claiming their forced labor camps are a lie, and their utilization in pushing false calm to the world about covid in the early days.
They are a state run organization under the control of a totalitarian regime who only pretends to be communist, their “articles” reflect that. As I said, they’re only useful in seeing where the wind is blowing.
-
My absolute favorites to follow are:
The Grayzone - it’s Max Blumenthal’s analysis.
Moon of Alabama - one guy’s perspectives on what to look out for
The Canary - for the UK perspective on its involvement in the world’s affairs.
Unlimited Hangout - a more analytical take on long-term established players.
MintPress News - more about the West’s influence in far-away regions.
And for technology:
Techdirt - Crazy legal proceedings, frivolous lawsuits… at times both sad, and very much hilarious.
BBC for international news, CBC for national news and Nature for science news. That gets me the basic discussion, I have to go to niche communities devoted to a specific issue if I want the real story about things.
I use traditional mainstream news sources. I don’t subscribe to the ridiculous way of thinking with this “fake news” mindset that has swept social media. Yes journalists can have biases but that’s fine when taken into consideration. Quite frankly that mindset nothing but a way to polarize the population.
Have you heard anything in the news about the 5 OPCW whistleblowers reporting that the US justification for bombing Syria 2 years ago was a false flag operation? Or that the US blocked OPCW testimony at the UN Security Council about the matter?
No, I don’t follow what’s going on in Syria.
Is this the part where I’m supposed to do my own research and then stumble upon extremist literature and then become woke.
Lol no of course not. I just wanted to understand who you are and now I know. I don’t really care about ignorant americans they’re quickly becoming irrelevant.
I use literally hundreds of sources for my news. Whenever I come across a new news source, I always see what Media Bias Factcheck has to say about them, and base my decision to rely on them accordingly.
I would be quite sceptical of a site that lists US state media as “least biased”. And their definition of left/right are clearly in a US context as well (liberal vs conservative).
As for traditional media news sources: a good idea is to look for ones not targeted at you specifically as you will be able to notice the propaganda parts more easily (or they are irrelevant to you)*. Usually that means looking for foreign news sources from relatively neutral places (Switzerland, Singapur, Japan etc.). English language versions of those have to be taken with a grain of salt again of course, but often they are just translations.
Reading news coverage of your own country from a foreign news outlet can be a real eye-opener on just how much the local media tries to shape mainstream opinion instead of just reporting on news.
*No one is immune to propaganda, and the best propaganda is the one that you don’t even notice.
