how do you know if you are getting the story?

[bergenski]

What sources do you use to primarily get your information from? And how do you know if you can trust it or not? I was thinking of news information, but anywhere you usually get your information on the world from...

[Al Cpwn]

Where do you primarily get your information from? And how do you know if you can trust it?
BBC

edit: FOX news too.

[sasapurdue]

What information?

[eyebyte_atWork]

News, then foreign news, then reflection, then denial.

[Stillwater]

Google news for headlines and deeper searches by topic. Public radio. News Hour (PBS), BBC news. Christian Science Monitor- in spite of the name, they are not religious in their reporting, and it is the only source that does all of their own first hand reporting- everything else seems to be recycled wire stories these days. Assorted wacky internet sites, too embarassed to mention- followed by checking out claims in more reliable sources. Occassionally dable in foreign shortwave radio broadcasts.

[distraction tactics]

CNN, CBC, Global National, CTV, BBC (rarely - *zzzzz*), Maclean's, Time, Newsweek, Western Standard, every once inawhile a 'left wing rag', The Manitoban, Winnipeg Free Press, Winnipeg Sun, National Post (no funnies? wtf!), Yahoo! newswires, message boards, blogs, etc.

Do I get the whole story? Of course not. I only need to read about an area of interest with which I have experience to see how badly reporters can mangle the facts, but with a loose corroboration over time from different sources I believe I can get a fairly accurate picture of what's going on.

[Lori]

i tend to use the BBC website. Occaisionally msn or yahoo, but very rarely.

[outcast]

What sources do you use to primarily get your information from? And how do you know if you can trust it or not? I was thinking of news information, but anywhere you usually get your information on the world from...


Depends. I like NPR alot for news. For scientific data and research information, the databases I can get to through my university suffice. I am always finding new sources of information (too many to count) and I always have to validate them first, but there are a lot out there. Oh, I don't like anything that is .com.

[CoHo]

NPR and BBC and if I feel that the content might be slanted (and interesting) I may refer to google news to get a general cencus

[Superstring]

What sources do you use to primarily get your information from? And how do you know if you can trust it or not? I was thinking of news information, but anywhere you usually get your information on the world from...

BBC for online news, CTV newsnet (Canada) for TV news, Daily Show with Jon Stewart for American news....CNN for escaping boredom.

BBC is the most concise, accurate and unbiased reporting as far as I can tell, and they tend to prioritize the world's stories in an order that makes the most sense to me, unlike most other sources of news, I find.

CTV newsnet is 24 hour tv news and again very neutral, and covers all the world's most pressing stories at a good steady pace.

The Daily Show I can trust to summarize 24 hours worth of CNN in 5 hilarious minutes, followed by more hilarity afterwards.

But to me the most important of all is the news that comes out the scientific community, they make phenomenal breakthroughs every day that they never report in the mainstream media. For that I use these sites:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/

and to a lesser extent

http://www.newscientist.com/home.ns

[Hustler]

I just use my intuition to imagine what the real story is/should be and leave it at that.

[Wiki]

Real Time with Bill Maher

[Al Cpwn]

I'm surprised noone got the joke about FOX

[Snowflake]

We thought you were serious.

[distraction tactics]

Fox news really isn't as bad as the hype. When I had it, I found it was more their presentation than anything.

On the note of unlikely candidates, I've come to respect The Christian Science Monitor (http://www.csmonitor.com/index.html).

[Al Cpwn]

Fox news really isn't as bad as the hype. When I had it, I found it was more their presentation than anything.

On the note of unlikely candidates, I've come to respect The Christian Science Monitor (http://www.csmonitor.com/index.html).
Yea CSM is really well written and unbiased (from what I've read so far). All thats christian about them is the name.