I’m sceptical, the only difference between news sources is how your bias gets confirmed, or not.
Even “impartial” sources use framing and subtle use of words to push an opinion.
There’s a reason exceedingly rich people invest in news outlets. It’s a loss leader. They are purchasing a 20k watt sound system to drown out any opposing view.
I’m sceptical, the only difference between news sources is how your bias gets confirmed, or not.
This is right-wing propaganda you’re regurgitating here. It’s the whole foundation of things like FoxNews: claim all news is biased, and poor conservatives are not being represented, and then make a conservative news outlet and claim it’s fair because “all sources are biased.”
Sure, it’s true, there is no such thing as completely unbiased, which is why this has a grain of truth to it. All the best lies are rooted in some reality. But there are sources that are far more accurate and less biased than others. “Well, they’re all biased” is just more of the “all sides are the same!” BS.
Thank you, I ha e never heard of the top 3. I’ll check them out
Edit: so that picture seems accurate. However, the actual website for the chart updates it regularly and I have a few problems with it. CNN is listed as reliable now which is wild ASF. They are also partnered with META and the “top 3” that I mentioned are no longer on the top. The worst part is, I can’t even see what’s on top, it’s just gray dots and only shows the big sources that are unreliable. You have to search for specific news sources in order to find out how reliable it is according to said website.
If it’s from someone else who has any interest in how you act about things, it’s probably fake. If it’s from your dog about which particular small mammal or bird they saw, you can believe it.
Depends heavily on where you get your news.
I’m sceptical, the only difference between news sources is how your bias gets confirmed, or not. Even “impartial” sources use framing and subtle use of words to push an opinion. There’s a reason exceedingly rich people invest in news outlets. It’s a loss leader. They are purchasing a 20k watt sound system to drown out any opposing view.
This is right-wing propaganda you’re regurgitating here. It’s the whole foundation of things like FoxNews: claim all news is biased, and poor conservatives are not being represented, and then make a conservative news outlet and claim it’s fair because “all sources are biased.”
Sure, it’s true, there is no such thing as completely unbiased, which is why this has a grain of truth to it. All the best lies are rooted in some reality. But there are sources that are far more accurate and less biased than others. “Well, they’re all biased” is just more of the “all sides are the same!” BS.
So what do you think are reliable news sources?
https://guides.library.harvard.edu/newsleans/thechart
Thank you, I ha e never heard of the top 3. I’ll check them out
Edit: so that picture seems accurate. However, the actual website for the chart updates it regularly and I have a few problems with it. CNN is listed as reliable now which is wild ASF. They are also partnered with META and the “top 3” that I mentioned are no longer on the top. The worst part is, I can’t even see what’s on top, it’s just gray dots and only shows the big sources that are unreliable. You have to search for specific news sources in order to find out how reliable it is according to said website.
you might like reuters.com and apnews.com for spinless.
If it’s from someone else who has any interest in how you act about things, it’s probably fake. If it’s from your dog about which particular small mammal or bird they saw, you can believe it.