toldailytopic: Which news media source do you trust the most and why?

Town Heretic

Out of Order
Hall of Fame
I only watch Fox News. I think that they are fair and balanced.
Stands to reason. I mean what can you compare it to? :eek:

I don't really like Bill O'reilly because he seems to sometimes put his on swing on some news in order to present his opinion above the facts.
I like O'Reilly as a pundit. He's entertaining, right or wrong. But like Hannity and everything that isn't straight news, it's slanted and means to be, which is fine. I don't think you can criticize an op-ed section for being opinionated.

I think CNN is one sided in what it reports about the government. PMS NBC is totally out.
PMS NBC? :sibbie: :shocked: :chuckle:

I like to surf for international perspectives. The BBC is always interesting. Trust most...probably the Wall Street Journal.
 

MrRadish

New member
On a serious note, my family tends to watch Al-Jazeera English mostly these days. Because it's global news it tends to waste less time covering provincial stories like sex scandals, individual crimes, human interest pieces et cetera that are tedious and irrelevant, and instead tends to look at real issues that affect countries or the whole world. It has a little bit of a tendency to give more coverage to events in the Arab/Muslim world and are somewhat anti-Israeli, but nothing a quick look at the BBC or The Independent can't balance out. Besides, there is a lot going on there at the moment.

They also do very little in the way of 'Man in the Street', vox pops-style interviews and instead dedicate large blocks of time to talking to social philosophers, economists, politicians, and government workers in a really in-depth way that gives them time to properly express themselves, rather than just baiting them for soundbites.

I really do recommend giving it a look.
 

Choleric

New member
Anything but cable or mainline news. RT is good if you can get it. I get almost all of my news from the internet. Fox News is bought and paid for. They are a complete waste of time except for simply learning that something is happening. Going to FOX for the details of a story is like going to the History Channel to find out what Christianity is all about.

Complete waste of time. Bill O'Reilly is a complete joke and Hannity basically worships the Republican Party. I think he would support genocide if Rush and the RNC came out in favor of it. The man is incapable of an independent thought.
 

TomO

Get used to it.
Hall of Fame
That's like asking which meth addict I trust the most. :plain:


I would have to go with NPR/Wall St. Journal. (Tie) :idunno:






* I used to read The Economist and pretty well trusted it (even when I didn't agree with it)....but I can't really afford it any more. :sigh:
 

bybee

New member
Anything but cable or mainline news. RT is good if you can get it. I get almost all of my news from the internet. Fox News is bought and paid for. They are a complete waste of time except for simply learning that something is happening. Going to FOX for the details of a story is like going to the History Channel to find out what Christianity is all about.

Complete waste of time. Bill O'Reilly is a complete joke and Hannity basically worships the Republican Party. I think he would support genocide if Rush and the RNC came out in favor of it. The man is incapable of an independent thought.

Somehow, I sense a reverse and equally implacably biased perspective on your part?
 

Choleric

New member
Somehow, I sense a reverse and equally implacably biased perspective on your part?

Perhaps. I am a conservative Christian who tends to vote republican. I used to watch Fox all the time and only Fox. But as real journalism has made a resurgence since the internet, I have realized just how much of a "product" cable new is. They aren't really interested in hashing out the details, and they typically leave out gigantic parts of the news story that are vitally important. It is like arguing about the color of the carpet as the house burns down, a complete waste of time.

I remember watching Fox news once and they had a guest on talking about how the Gulf of Tonkeen was staged (you know the event that got us into Vietnam). The guest mentioned how the government faked it just to get us to go over there and fight that war and one of the hosts (kimberly guilfolle sp?) was standing there in shocked amazement and said "that is quite a charge against your country" and Geraldo (one of the few worth watching along with Napolitano on Fox Business, a channel I don't get) had to talk her off the edge by telling her that it was a documented fact and everybody knew it, and I think she was likely as shocked by his answer as the guests.

She has no idea of any facts that don't roll across her teleprompter. THe same can be said of most of them. She is no more a "journalist" than I am, and I have learned that they are selling news, not being journalists.

I would assume O'Reilly spends about an hour in production meetings before his show with his producers trying to get the facts straight, then goes on the air as the authority. I loved O'Reilly after 9-11, but have since started to see him for what he is, a news salesman. Like I said, complete waste of time.

Most stories and the details break on some obscure web site before making it to the news.
 

bybee

New member
Perhaps. I am a conservative Christian who tends to vote republican. I used to watch Fox all the time and only Fox. But as real journalism has made a resurgence since the internet, I have realized just how much of a "product" cable new is. They aren't really interested in hashing out the details, and they typically leave out gigantic parts of the news story that are vitally important. It is like arguing about the color of the carpet as the house burns down, a complete waste of time.

I remember watching Fox news once and they had a guest on talking about how the Gulf of Tonkeen was staged (you know the event that got us into Vietnam). The guest mentioned how the government faked it just to get us to go over there and fight that war and one of the hosts (kimberly guilfolle sp?) was standing there in shocked amazement and said "that is quite a charge against your country" and Geraldo (one of the few worth watching along with Napolitano on Fox Business, a channel I don't get) had to talk her off the edge by telling her that it was a documented fact and everybody knew it, and I think she was likely as shocked by his answer as the guests.

She has no idea of any facts that don't roll across her teleprompter. THe same can be said of most of them. She is no more a "journalist" than I am, and I have learned that they are selling news, not being journalists.

I would assume O'Reilly spends about an hour in production meetings before his show with his producers trying to get the facts straight, then goes on the air as the authority. I loved O'Reilly after 9-11, but have since started to see him for what he is, a news salesman. Like I said, complete waste of time.

Most stories and the details break on some obscure web site before making it to the news.

Well my friend I cannot argue with any of your points! I don't trust any of the networks completely but try to get a cross section of views so as to, perhaps, get at some truth.
But it is depressing because everything is done behind closed doors and is a fait accompli by the time it becomes public knowledge.
The Federal Government has become too powerful.
 

Breathe

New member
Well my friend I cannot argue with any of your points! I don't trust any of the networks completely but try to get a cross section of views so as to, perhaps, get at some truth.
But it is depressing because everything is done behind closed doors and is a fait accompli by the time it becomes public knowledge.
The Federal Government has become too powerful.

I also get my news from a wide variety of online and television sources. That way, I feel as if I am getting a more balanced perspective than if I only get my news from one place. However, my husband is a rabid FOX news fan boi, and I tease him often about "drinking the kool aid". :D
 

Cleekster

Active member
I don't trust any of them .......but i go to Fox for the Neo-Con view and CNN for a more liberal view as well as some online sources....having said that i'll watch Stossel and Napolitano...and used to watch Glenn Beck.
 

MrRadish

New member
Just read this article and thought it might interest people who believe FOX to be a reliable source of news.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/201111160010

Incidentally, before people start saying that the article I've cited is biased, I should point out that it all hinges around one central assertion by FOX: that article 28, section 144 of the US Constitution contains the phrase, "expressed an opinion concerning the merits of the particular case in controversy". This can easily be verified by looking at said article of the Constitution and seeing what it says... Except there is no such article, so the report cannot possibly be true. In actual fact, that quote is from the US Code, which is something different entirely.

It's either a mistake, indicating very poor journalistic standards in one of America's biggest news providers, or deliberate, indicating that FOX is prepared to lie in order to advance its own agenda.
 
Top