News Sources

Sam Or I · Post by **Sam Or I** » 2003-04-06 05:28am

Which news source would you trust the most with the real facts of the war with Iraq? In other words which do you believe is the least biased?

Marc Xavier · Post by **Marc Xavier** » 2003-04-06 05:29am

None of them.

Companion Cube · Post by **Companion Cube** » 2003-04-06 06:20am

Marc Xavier wrote:None of them.

Agreed, it's just a case of finding the least biased source, or taking everything you hear/read/see with a large grain of salt.

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-04-06 06:43am

Definitely not a single one.

Post by **weemadando** » 2003-04-06 07:15pm

I tend to use BBC and DeutscheWelle with Al Jazeera as a counter-point.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-04-06 07:19pm

A little bit of everything. The bias counterbalances, so I'd like to think.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2003-04-06 07:28pm

Well, if you watch CNN, we're losing the war. If you watch Fox, we're winning the war. So the truth is probably somewhere in the middle. Though I think the New York Times does a good job, as does Reuters.

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2003-04-06 07:46pm

I tend to listen to the BBC news on Canadian radio. They seem pretty reliable and I follow Time, Newsweek and some of the papers. MSNBC and CNN seem fairly reliable. Fox has some stuff but you have to read between the lines, same for anything from the Arab press.

Everyone from Al-Jazeera to Fox News has some bias and all of them are engaged in a feeding frenzy so most will run with anything that they like. In this I'd say anything not

desertjedi · Post by **desertjedi** » 2003-04-07 03:31am

I don't trust any of them until whatever news item is reported on at least two major news networks (not just a blurb on the ticker either)... I try to watch BBC and read their site more often though.

Post by **Edi** » 2003-04-07 03:50am

I get what I need from Finnish media, mainly the Yle1 and Yle2 TV (two state-owned channels) news, MTV3 (privately owned, commercial TV channel, the M stands for 'mainos', which is commercial in Finnish) news and the newspaper Helsingin Sanomat. They all use a wide variety of sources, and both privately and state-owned news organizations are subject to constant, very strict scrutiny. Faking reports nets them serious consequences because of that, and so far I've not seen biased reporting. Sure, people they interview may be biased, but when they report stuff, it's facts only: this and this happened (or was reported to happen). Then they ask for comments from experts, so you get the spin and the facts, clearly separated and easy to tell apart.

Of the big international channels, BBC World is the only one I have access to, and aside from the live broadcasts of press (propaganda) briefings from Doha, White House, Pentagon and Iraq most of the relevant news is in the first 15 minutes of every hour. Pain in the ass trying to get any coherent big picture of their 24/7 soundbyte-of-the-minute coverage (which is remarkably accurate, though, just too disjointed), and from what people have said here, I've been given to understand the American networks are worse.

Edi

Enforcer Talen · Post by **Enforcer Talen** » 2003-04-07 05:16am

Sam Or I wrote:Which news source would you trust the most with the real facts of the war with Iraq? In other words which do you believe is the least biased?

sdnet.

Queeb Salaron · Post by **Queeb Salaron** » 2003-04-07 11:48am

The only things I can really trust are the articles that come from AP and Reuters. At very least they quote their sources accurately and keep the editorializing to a minimum. Seems like they've got their acts together there. The only problem is that there's so much stuff that comes out of Iraq from both AP and Reuters that it's hard to read it all in one sitting.

jegs2 · Post by **jegs2** » 2003-04-07 11:55am

Sam Or I wrote:Which news source would you trust the most with the real facts of the war with Iraq? In other words which do you believe is the least biased?

For least biased, I take a balance of CNN and BBC. I go to Fox News if I want to feel better about the war.

Glocksman · Post by **Glocksman** » 2003-04-07 02:05pm

Compare the headlines off of these news sources.

All sites were sampled at about 1:45 PM Eastern time.

CBC (Canada): Hong Kong fears tripling of SARS cases.
ABC (Australia): Missile attack kills civilians as Baghdad battle rages
BBC (UK): US troops storm central Baghdad
Sky News: (UK): 'SMOKING GUN' CHEMICAL FIND
The Guardian (UK): US forces in central Baghdad
The Independent (UK): US troops seize key buildings in the heart of Baghdad
Fox News (US): BOMBS HIT BAGHDAD; URBAN RIOTS REPORTED
CNN (US): U.S. STORMS BAGHDAD
NPR (US): U.S. Forces Raid Baghdad; British Take Basra
Evansville Courier & Press (US): U.S. Forces Meet Resistance in Baghdad

Of course Fox and Sky have the most lurid headlines. CNN isn't much farther behind though.
Hell, I'm conservative and yet I find myself embarrassed when I watch Fox News.

irishmick79 · Post by **irishmick79** » 2003-04-07 02:10pm

As far as TV media goes, I would have CNN with Fox News as a counterpoint.

For print media, it's hard to beat the New York Times for international news coverage. They have their own biases for sure, but for the most part they give you a lot of details and report a lot of stuff that you won't find on CNN or the other cable news networks.

Knife · Post by **Knife** » 2003-04-07 02:50pm

None and all. I watch as many different tv outlets as possible, and read (in print or online) as many as I can and piece the info together for my self. I probably watch foxnews the most, but only cuz the chicks are cute.....

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

News Sources

News Sources

Re: News Sources

Re: News Sources