Where can you find a reliable, fairly unbiased source of information?
 

We've all seen the debate here. The Left-wingers don't like any news from Fox. The Right-wingers don't like MSNBC. Both sides tend to use the source that the other doesn't like when they start a discussion. We all are cautious with CNN after their scandal came to the surface. I don't think we can rely on the New York Times until they get back on their feet.

Where do we go to get that true, unbiased news? I personally am quite satisfied with BBC, but I do see somewhat of a slant in their reporting. Is there any source that can give us a truly balanced, fair source of pure information? Or do I have to settle for hopping back and forth between Fox, NBC, and BBC and drawing out the stuff that they all cite as hard, undisputable facts and filtering out the slant?

i like christian science monitor, www.csmonitor.com (not religious at all, it's just a name).

they're pretty fair.

also, CNN aint too bad.

If you want fair unbiased reporting, you won't get it on any broadcast news. Except maybe Jim Lehrer's News Hour. PBS might be getting some (ridiculous) flack lately from republicans, but Jim Lehrer keeps his broadcasts unbiased.

PBS & BBC are very good.

I watch two Dutch news broadcasts (commercial and non-commercial), the Belgian news, the BBC and CNN. I also check various newspapers and online sources.

All in all, I think *I* am a reliable, fairly unbiased source of info. You can be the same. :)

BBC
The Economist
The Times

None of them are perfect, but they are quite good.

There are lots of foreign media sources that are very reliable too, including Arab ones, but I am not enough of an expert to recommend any.

I trust Guardian UK and CNN most of the time, but everyone is biased at times, you just have to filter out the bullshit. Hell, even FOX is occassionally on the spot about things.

CNN is just as biased as NBC, and I don't know how reputable The Guardian is these days. I generally get my news from NBC (left) and a local talk radio station (right), which balances things out a bit.

CNN has openly admitted that they were slanting everything that came out of Iraq. Although I depend more on Fox than any other source, there is no way that a single source of information can give an accurate picture of what is really happening in the world. Newspapers tend to be more slanted than broadcast news - the news magazines are owned by the news media so I don't know how you get a true view of anything - I guess you check a number of sources and sort it out for yourself. During the war with Iraq it seemed that al Jazeera (probably mispelled) had more sources available but, it also seemed as though they were either willingly or perhaps unwillingly being used by the Iraqi government as a mouthpiece.

Offline I read the Guardian Weekly with separate sections devoted to articles from the Washington Post and Le Monde.

Australian sources are The Bulletin and The Sydney Morning Herald.

Occasionally I like to get the International Herald Tribune (especially when travelling).

Online I take the light irreverance of www.salon.com and balance it with the stodgy earnestness of www.foreignaffairs.org.

I don't bother much with broadcast news anymore, I might switch on the BBC if I'm doing the ironing.

BBC, CBC, CBC International, talk radio, FARK, salon.com, and any other news item that comes my way via the web. I never rely on one source.
I have a hard time understanding how anyone can watch FOX or similar. Any newscast that has anchormen adding their biased comments when they finish a story isn’t news, it's propaganda.
Just the story please, leaves the comments to the commentators.

i read the houston chronicle everyday, and i've seen a left-wing bias in their stories (Mostly editorials), but they do have liberal tendencies (which i like!)

I forgot to mention the Washington Post. Very good reporting going on there. Not to mention a good range of left-to-right editorials.

www.drudgereport.com ^^

ITN world news

ITN's website

<a href="http://www.thesmokinggun.com/">The Smoking Gun</a>

Another valuable site, a little more scandal focused by its nature. ;)

LD nailed it. It's not any single source, you need to have multiple sources. It's also important to know the slant of each source.

I listened to shortwave radio a lot between 1976 and 1982. One of my favorites was Radio Moscow. You could discern a lot; not from what they were talking about, but from what they were NOT talking about.

CNN, BBC, CBC, NBC, CBS

my sources are wall street journal, bbc, CSM, economist and Fark.

Id stay away from all US media right now because it is all tainted by pro- US leanings. Go to either the BBC or Reuters for more objective news on international events. OR better still, find local news sources in the part of the world that you are interested in leaning more about. Like Liquor Dealer said, find multiple news sources for a more objective view of whats really going on.

I read and watch US Media stuff for the US. When it comes to outside the US I try to find information from other sources more localized to the issue.

Personally, I like looking at the female talking heads on Fox.

i agree with Christian Science Monitor and BBC.

Almost all mass media news sources are biased in some way.

Thats why news from the net is so good...

i'd just look at all the places people suggest and find what ur looking for

For the Israeli / Palestine Issue

http://www.fmep.org/

I read the funnies in my local newspaper. On a more serious note, try this. Pick two sources of news on a national or local basis. Choose one or two national (or local) stories and judge the coverage they give them. Do this for about 1 week, with several different stories during the course of that week. Pick the one you feel is most unbiased (or biased the way you like it) and pick another news source. Repeat the whole procedure with the 2 new newssources. If you do this on a continual basis you will start to see the bias that exists in media and will be able to make your own decisions on their content. You will become familiar with the stance of each outlet concerning different topics, there is no one source that is unbiased or biased for all topics. For instance the New York Times is way left on guns, but only slightly left of center on big business. The sources mentioned above are all very good. Over time they all change so keeping up with their current bias is demanding. Newspapers, magazines and television should not be your only source for fact.

Can't disagree with that :)

Hmmm.. I've been somewhat dissapointed with the BBC of late so I've been on a bit of a cruise for other sources.

======
StratFor
======
Site: www.stratfor.com
Type: Pay/Free
The site is probably one of the best sources of info on the net. It offers some free stuff and various options to get more depending on you bank balance ;) It's primarily a supplier to governments, media and the corporate sector. It's unbiased, very detailed and very professional but you don't get the best from it unless you're willing to shell out some cash.

=======
Channel 4
=======
Site: www.channel4.com
Type: Free UK media company
There's a lot more here than news (and most of it only really of interest if you're in the UK) but the news sections is _very_ good and remarkably less biased than the BBC. They even have a reporter who famously turned down a retainer from the UK intelligence services.

CBC (you americans should give it a shot)

BBC (without a doubt)

I must admit that i like Dan Rather, and Peter Jennings as far as anchors go.

How does one get CBC in the US? I've only seen it a few times on a C-SPAN simulcast.

I have a direcTV dish and I get CBC Newsworld International. It's got most of the CBC news on it. It's channel 366, if that helps.

Peter Jennings I can understand cause he is Canadian, but whats with Dan Rather?

I hear a lot of CBC comments in here. For us, it depend on where you live. The CBC is generally considered by Western Canadians (Western Canada starts at Winnipeg city limits) as having a HEAVY eastern, pro-Liberal party bias. Generally a centre left point of view. On the other hand, CanWest Global is centre right. So for unbiased Canadian coverage?? No such animal. Get you fix from CBC, National Post Online (owned by Global) and Globe and Mail (eastern paper, but good unbiased coverage.)

Toronto is NOT the centre of the universe!! (But it can keep its SARS, thank you very much.)

Go with the Christian Science Monitor.

Just stay away from CNN, MSNBC, and Foxnews

BBC is pretty good though

theres nothing left about msnbc or most of the large networks. They are all biased. bbc news is aight, and pbs. australian sources are good. it sucks that you have to dig out the truth from the slanted BS. I give up!!!! thats it, im turning on Bill O'Reilly!!! if u cant beat em...

www.alternet.org, www.antiwar.com

I remember The Guardian slanted a news article to benefit the left once, so be on your toes about them.

If you don't want a bias, stay away from ANY media outlet. :D

Get it through as many sources as you can, they are all pretty much as bad as the next, but once you have it from all the sources then it becomes a balanced story and you can use that to extrapolate whats really going on. Otherwise the only unbiased report you'll get is being an eyewitness.

Bathroom walls. Only place that you can know for sure when you're stepping in the crap.

Uh, doesn't izzy asper own canwest global???????

Izzy is a card carrying liberal and his son david fired the editor of the ottawa citizen last year or the year before for writing a column critical of chretien and suggesting that it was time for him to go (Russell somebody or other.) Though i do agree with your comment about the globe and mail - truly a great paper.

Sars, yeah, the Federal gov't has contributed 150 million WHOLE dollars towards aid in what has cost this city 2 billion now, and has cost the province 945 million.

http://www.cbc.ca/storyview/MSN/2003...ensation030627

Centre of the universe gets the short end of the stick - always.

As usual, we can only rely on ourselves

Thanks for the support bolshevist :(

I use reuters.com mostly.