What's the most unbiased online news source to get news from?

WSJ has a good news bureau if your goal is to get a good idea of what is happening with big stories around the world. The investor class needs accurate information to base their investment decisions on. That is what the WSJ does with its news coverage. The editorial page is basically Fox News for smart people.

Christian Science Monitor is also a good source.

For international news, BBC, AFP and Al Jazeera are good to watch to get stories that the US press may not pick up.

60 minutes is still the gold standard for investigative reporting on TV, but it is just a shadow of its former self thanks to all the turmoil at CBS.

For reporting on politics, NYT and WaPo consistently have the best sources and are closest to the stories in the US.

Some of the best investigative reporting right now is at The Intercept and Pro Publica.

hoo-ah wrote:

NPR as *centrist*? N.Y.T?!?

Business Insider?

Ofer cryin'... NYTimes engages in outright character assassination and lies (at least since Trump won).

My source is cited, and that source provided its methodology. Fell free to point out whatever issues you take with the methodology, and explain how you’d correct for those issues.

Just because the result does not agree with your own personal bias, does not mean an analysis is flawed. To use the NYT as an example, you may not like the fact that they have recently reported on the grand magnitude of Trumps business losses in the 80’s and early 90’s. However, that reporting was based on legitimate, reliable sources (IRS tax transcripts) and is, to the best of anyone’s ability to discern, factual. Furthermore, the analysis that was part of the reporting did lay out appropriate context in stating that such losses likely reflected a somewhat extreme exploitation of a legal tax loophole, rather than a true $1B economic loss. Finally, while the information does reflect poorly on Trump, it is clearly of public value as Trump’s primary qualification for office was/is his self declared business prowess.

So, yes, that reporting does reflect poorly on the character and ability of our President, but it is also factual, largely free of bias, and of legitimate public interest.

TMZ

The only need source you'll ever need.

CNN is nor a left equivalent to Fox. Fox is the only fair and balanced cable news (other than OAN), and CNN is a fake news media.

As for newspapers, Washington Times and New York Post are far better than NYT and WaPo.

BS to all of that.

+1 wrote:

Cpt. Obvious wrote:

letsrun.com

+1

Came here to post this. I get all my news from letsrun. Good balance of all points of views.

I hope you aren't serious.

News is different than "points of view".

Another vote for AP and Reuters.

Getting Old wrote:

Sources that are largely factual reporting, with minimal analysis:

- AP

- Reuters

- BBC

Sources that mix factual reporting and in-depth analysis, but which contain minimal opinion:

(ordered in terms of editorial bias from skews mildly liberal to skews mildly conservative)

- NPR & PBS, NYT, WAPO

- ABC News & NBC News

- Bloomberg, WSJ

Here is a link to the "Media Bias Chart" produced by Ad Fontes Media which is generally agreed to be largely non-biased. You can read more about the source of the chart and its methodology at the site.

https://www.adfontesmedia.com/intro-to-the-media-bias-chart/

So a leftist puts her personal opinion of news sources on a chart. The "methodology" is to slot based on her own biases. Wow. Impressive non-bias. AP is exactly neutral. Nice to know this.

brilliant chart wrote:

Getting Old wrote:

Sources that are largely factual reporting, with minimal analysis:

- AP

- Reuters

- BBC

Sources that mix factual reporting and in-depth analysis, but which contain minimal opinion:

(ordered in terms of editorial bias from skews mildly liberal to skews mildly conservative)

- NPR & PBS, NYT, WAPO

- ABC News & NBC News

- Bloomberg, WSJ

Here is a link to the "Media Bias Chart" produced by Ad Fontes Media which is generally agreed to be largely non-biased. You can read more about the source of the chart and its methodology at the site.

https://www.adfontesmedia.com/intro-to-the-media-bias-chart/

So a leftist puts her personal opinion of news sources on a chart. The "methodology" is to slot based on her own biases. Wow. Impressive non-bias. AP is exactly neutral. Nice to know this.

Guessing you're putting Fox and Breitbart as neutral?

There’s News and Entertainment. Each source is likely to have both.

Alan

What color is the sky in your world?

trollism wrote:[/b

Guessing you're putting Fox and Breitbart as neutral?

No. I actually tried to understand this "methodology" and hoped to see some data mining or even some specific criteria. Turns out someone just made a chart by themselves and useful idiots proliferate it as gospel.

Keep in mind Flagpole is one of the farthest LEFT people that posts on this site. He thinks Obama was a great President and thinks Hillary Clinton is an ethical person. Just figured I'd put some context towards Flagpole's opinions about what is an "unbiased" news source.

Flagpole wrote:

+1 wrote:

+1

Came here to post this. I get all my news from letsrun. Good balance of all points of views.

I hope you aren't serious.

News is different than "points of view".

News is all about interpretations.

brilliant chart wrote:

So a leftist puts her personal opinion of news sources on a chart. The "methodology" is to slot based on her own biases. Wow. Impressive non-bias. AP is exactly neutral. Nice to know this.

In a word, no.

First off, on what basis do you declare the founder of the organization (who created the original iteration of the chart, but whom no longer performs the analysis) a leftist? Is it because she is a women? Is it because she has a graduate degree (a JD)? Or is it simply because you don't agree with the results of her analysis?

Secondly, the methodology is not simply to "slot based on her own biases". There is a predefined rubric of objective criteria that is used to rank the properties of the media content that was analyzed. For example, Veracity - the frequency with which the purportedly factual statements in a piece of content are actually true. If a piece of content contains the statement, "a record number of people attended president Trump' inauguration", then that piece would have a low Veracity score because that factual statement is demonstrably false. Since these are objective criteria, the impact of subjective bias is minimized (this is exactly the same way sports like diving and figure skating are judged). The underlying data is available, has been reviewed by numerous people from both sides of the political spectrum, and has not been found to be systematically bias by any legitimate commentator (i.e. not Alex Jones).

Finally, if you can point to a similarly transparent, and systematic analysis that reaches different conclusions I am all ears. I'm not saying the Media Bias Chart is indisputably correct. However, the fact of the matter is that the methodology and underlying data are published and review-able, and the methods do legitimately attempt to correct for subjective bias. That allows me to view the source as legitimate and valuable, though certainly not infallible. Adding another legitimate source of information is always valuable, even when the conclusions of its analysis dispute those of other legitimate, valuable sources.

[quote]Getting Old wrote:

Just because the result does not agree with your own personal bias, does not mean an analysis is flawed. To use the NYT as an example, you may not like the fact that they have recently reported on the grand magnitude of Trumps business losses in the 80’s and early 90’s.

Baloney. This is not news and anyone paying attention knew this long ago.

Letsrun board, where it's necessary to explain that someone who does not think Obama/Hillary are the devil incarnate is worth an apology and explanation.

hoo-ah wrote:

NYTimes engages in outright character assassination and lies (at least since Trump won).

If only that were true.

brilliant chart wrote:

So a leftist puts her personal opinion of news sources on a chart. The "methodology" is to slot based on her own biases. Wow. Impressive non-bias. AP is exactly neutral. Nice to know this.

Personally, I'm a centrist, and figured that person was a far right male Trump supporter.