Most Unbiased News Resource?

Predator · Post by **Predator** » 2004-06-26 03:40am

BBC, though they're still slanted.

Is anybody going to actually admit they voted FOX?

SWPIGWANG · Post by **SWPIGWANG** » 2004-06-26 05:39am

The onion is the most balanced news source, j00 f00lz.

Equal ignorance equals equal coverage.

Andrew J. · Post by **Andrew J.** » 2004-06-26 11:12am

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, obviously.

Ma Deuce · Post by **Ma Deuce** » 2004-06-26 01:38pm

From the list, I'd say the Beeb. theough they're not entirely unbiased. From my experience, AP or Reuters are the most trustwothy sources.

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2004-06-26 02:15pm

For generl news, always the BBC. I have the website as one tab when browsing, I had the ticker timer program until the new alerts app. came out and I have News 24 on in the background most the time.

Though Reuters, AP, ITN, FOX and Pravda are also good.

Heh, just kidding. Nobody's gullible enough to believe anything FOX says.

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2004-06-26 02:18pm

Predator wrote:BBC, though they're still slanted.

Is anybody going to actually admit they voted FOX?

Well, no one is without bias, but the Beeb, being state funded but independent for the people, is the best, IMHO. To trust Ruperty Murdoch's franchises like Sky or FOX news too much is silly when he had The Sun campaign against a woman who wanted to ban page 3 nudity (they apparently dug up all the dirt they could).

I do watch FOX sometimes, but only as entertainment, not "edu-tainment".

sketerpot · Post by **sketerpot** » 2004-06-26 02:30pm

Admiral Valdemar wrote:Heh, just kidding. Nobody's gullible enough to believe anything FOX says.

Nobody? I trust you're joking?

I had a teacher once who watched Fox. He also read aloud to the class a conservative polemic he got in his email containing such phrases as "birkenstock liberal hippies" and agreed with it, so I'd say that he actually believes it. Bam! "Nobody" disproven.

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2004-06-26 02:43pm

sketerpot wrote:
Admiral Valdemar wrote:Heh, just kidding. Nobody's gullible enough to believe anything FOX says.
Nobody? I trust you're joking?

I had a teacher once who watched Fox. He also read aloud to the class a conservative polemic he got in his email containing such phrases as "birkenstock liberal hippies" and agreed with it, so I'd say that he actually believes it. Bam! "Nobody" disproven.

Addendum: Nobody outside the US of A.

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2004-06-26 06:07pm

Reuters, they are usually very trustworthy since they aren't in the market of news distribution insomuch as they are in straight news reporting.

Prozac the Robert · Post by **Prozac the Robert** » 2004-06-26 07:02pm

I use a mixture of BBC and Google, and here of course. (Note, I'm in the UK)

Sometimes I wonder about google though. Just by deciding which news stories to show they could be biasing the news I get, but more important is their choice of which organisations news to put at the top of the list.

Notice that conservatives.com shows up as a source from time to time, but there is never anything from the labour or lib-dem websites.

LordShaithis · Post by **LordShaithis** » 2004-06-27 12:46am

CNN for the summary "Things That Exploded Today" round-up, BBC if I actually feel like reading.

Knife · Post by **Knife** » 2004-06-27 01:22am

So out of curiosity; how many who choose BBC live outside the US while those who choose a US based company?

Spyder · Post by **Spyder** » 2004-06-27 05:05am

Admiral Valdemar wrote:
Addendum: Nobody outside the US of A.

I don't think many providers outside the US bother showing Fox, I only found it on one of the networks for about three hours after midnight. CNN covers the "American view on world news" angle alright, if the market for "American news people giving each other verbal blow jobs" ever picks up then we might start seeing more of it.

Guardsman Bass · Post by **Guardsman Bass** » 2004-06-28 01:14am

Google probably IS the most unbiased, because a search engine does not have an opinion, so you get all the viewpoints across a political spectrum.

neoolong · Post by **neoolong** » 2004-06-28 01:19am

Guardsman Bass wrote:Google probably IS the most unbiased, because a search engine does not have an opinion, so you get all the viewpoints across a political spectrum.

It may depend on how sites come up for searches. It may not be a purposeful bias but may come about through who pays to have their sites come up first. At least that's how it is supposed to work at some search engines, don't know about google in particular.

Crown · Post by **Crown** » 2004-06-28 02:50am

I found this interesting in The Economist

Boxing with Fox
Jun 17th 2004
From The Economist print edition

Ofcom ticks off Fox News for a rant against the BBC

“NEXT time you hear the BBC bragging about how much superior the Brits are at delivering the news rather than Americans who wear flags in their lapels, remember, it was the Beeb caught lying.” Thus John Gibson of Fox News, a news channel owned by Rupert Murdoch, celebrated on air in January when Lord Hutton's report slammed the BBC's sloppiness. But Mr Gibson went too far for Ofcom, Britain's media regulator. This week it censured the channel for failing to show “respect for the truth”.

Mr Gibson had accused the BBC of “frothing-at-the-mouth anti-Americanism” and said that it “felt entitled to lie and, when caught lying, felt entitled to defend its lying reporters and executives”. When asked to stand up the claims, Fox News pointed to the BBC's recent appointment of an independent scrutineer of its Middle East coverage (which, Fox said, has a pro-Arab bias). As further evidence, it cited the 47,200 hits returned by a Google search for “BBC anti-American”. For their part, BBC staff were delighted with Mr Gibson's tirade: it showed Fox News in its true colours, they felt.

Fox News will care little about Ofcom's judgment. Janet Alshouse, its vice-president of news distribution, says it has no intention of reshaping itself for a British audience. In America, the channel's gung-ho news values, and its backing of the war on terror, has made it the most popular cable news network and the channel of choice at the Pentagon. If Ofcom's disapproval mounts, Fox may switch off in Britain. That might be a pity: Fox News is the only American news channel broadcast abroad as it is at home. CNN, by contrast, has a different version for overseas.

Privately, Ofcom admits that it has a problem with foreign news outfits like Fox News and al-Jazeera, a Qatar-based channel hated by the Pentagon. Both stations come as part of a package from Mr Murdoch's BSkyB satellite-TV service, along with a Chinese government channel, CCTV-9. The regulator is obliged to enforce the 50-year-old British requirement of impartiality in news, which was designed when the airwaves carried only a small number of national broadcasters. Now there are many foreign news channels, often being regulated differently, if at all. America's Federal Communications Commission, for instance, is quite happy for news to be opinionated.

Television executives have debated impartiality for years. One side says the current system means British television news enjoys high public trust. The other says that impartiality is a mirage: viewers would be better off with a wide range of openly biased news. A recent government-funded report by Ian Hargreaves, a journalist and academic, recommended that the law allow a more opinionated style. That would better serve brown, black and young people, he argued. [Crown says ]

This summer Ofcom will revise the rules it inherited from its predecessor, the Independent Television Commission, and it is likely slightly to loosen the one on impartiality. It may go further and draw a distinction between news channels aimed primarily at Britain and those made for overseas audiences. Like it or loathe it, Fox News—slogan “fair and balanced”—is probably here to stay.

Rather interesting wouldn't you say?

Post by **Gandalf** » 2004-06-28 02:57am

Wow, he really hates the Beeb.

I like that a Google search is some sort of proof of anything. I just checked and got 44000 results for "Mike Nugent god." Therefore I am almost as much God as BBC is anti-American.

Crown · Post by **Crown** » 2004-06-28 03:18am

Gandalf wrote:

Wow, he really hates the Beeb.

I like that a Google search is some sort of proof of anything. I just checked and got 44000 results for "Mike Nugent god." Therefore I am almost as much God as BBC is anti-American.

Yeah, that part cracked me up too!

BoredShirtless · Post by **BoredShirtless** » 2004-06-28 03:53am

On behalf of all humans, could we please hunt down and, if they were not joking, terminate the 6 imbeciles who voted FOX?

BoredShirtless · Post by **BoredShirtless** » 2004-06-28 03:55am

I don't see a difference between CNN and BBC, so the deciding factor is who has the hotter babes which is definetly CNN.

Son of the Suns · Post by **Son of the Suns** » 2004-06-28 03:58am

C-Span, get the news straight from the horse's mouth.

admiral_danielsben · Post by **admiral_danielsben** » 2004-06-28 08:10pm

kojikun wrote:Which of the do you consider the most unbiased, and thus most trustable, new resource on the web?

The Onion. They bash both sides.

Even I admit FOX News is biased. But it's bias I like. CNN and BBC have bias I don't like.

That's the thing with most news. It's biased in some way. Folks just listen to what they believe in and change the channel for what they don't.

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Most Unbiased News Resource?

Meh?

Re: Most Unbiased News Resource?