Just how valid is this chart?

Just how valid is this chart?

shift everything thats in the center to the far left, cnn should be off the fucking grid left

Invalid.

all those in the middle are way left of center.

lol

This is what Redditors actually believe

What would you change?

Vox is Buzzfeed-tier. NPR has always been very leftist, same with WaPo and NYT. I'm not sure who made this chart, but it's way off.

Not at all

Sup Forums is just going to tell you everything is wrong

Slate, Vox, and The Huffington Post should all be lower and towards the left. CNN should also be a bit further left (although admittedly their coverage of live events isn't that bad).

Wew lad, let's take a ride.

Liberal:
>Atlantic
>Slate
>Vox
All of which deserve to be in 'questionable journalistic value'
>Huffington Post
Into the trash it goes
>BBC
Largely inapplicable for American news purposes, also painfully liberal
>NPR
>NYT
>CNN
Skews liberal for sure
>AP
>ABC
>USA Today
Leans left

Conservative:
>The Hill
Not conservative (?)
>The Blaze
Not only does it not belong on this side, it is reserved for the third layer of hell, where Glenn B*ck resides
>InfoWars
Belongs in the 'One True News Source' category

I stopped looking when I saw Washington Post in the center. In other words, it's not accurate at all.

move everything in the middle column to the left once and CNN twice. BBC can stay in the middle.

Probably made by a liberal, judging by the fact that they said "Just no" for InfoWars and only "Don't read this" for avocado man

>Vox is more analytical than NYT

These cucks have the entire graph fucked up.

>NPR
>bipartisan

Probably made by an indoctrinated leftist.
NYT/BBC/CNN are hard left bias.

Just look at their "climate change" coverage.

lol mainstream media is pretty liberal, just shift the entire chart left a bit. CNN should go along with MSNBC

>Stealth Goatse

But where is the RT?

I stopped reading The Guardian after Brexit they have rolled down into shit.

The only source of news I trust.

Also BBC aren't centrist, they tend to left.

Move Breitbart into the blue bubble on the right, huffpaint into the trash, and CNN to the blue bubble on the left

>Just how valid is this chart?
Maybe before I would've found some merit in it, but I don't at this point because of the way things have shifted in terms stances.

Conservatives are now generally against globalization on an economic level so the Economist, which seems to be in favor of it very heavily, isn't really conservative.

Not only that, the chart seems to imply that partisanship=inaccuracy. Although partisanship can be a cause of inaccuracy, partisanship doesn't inherently mean inaccuracy so the chart is flawed just in its basic design.

>rueters
>less analytical than jew york times and lugeNPResse
Rueters is the only site I go besides pol.
They lean left so you have to learn to read with a filter.

This is the part where Sup Forums circlejerks about how shitty CNN is while unironically thinking Breitbart and Infowars are decent sources

>trusting a satire site for news

k

>(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((Vox)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

Pretty good.

0 accurate. This one is better.

OPs chart is shit and yours is ok

Havent you heard, user?

The entire world is now beyond satire.

Here is a better little graph.

Conspiracy theories are sometimes factual, hopefully people know the meaning of the words conspiracy and theory.

This chart is accurate. Conservatives tend to categorize any fact that runs counter to their belief system as leftist. So any news organization reporting objective facts is going to be labelled more to the left than they really are.

Most of you are pretty retarded, leftist media is not true at all. Anything leftist is agenda driven and not based in reality. The only true thing is nature, fascism follows nature.

Utter nonsense from the get-go with NPR and BBC placed where they are. State funded propaganda can only ever be weighted, it cannot even begin to be non-partisan.

they didn't make the journalistic quality axis long enough, so that's why salon isn't visible there

None, THe issue is that they put Salon in an area of trust. That's instant bullshit.

>wikileaks
>not in the top
Not accurate at all

>bbc great source of news

get the fuck out

Vox is ridiculously biased, should be at least hyper liberal, if not utter garbage.

Total bullshit to put Fox on a strata below MSNBC and Huffpo, Huffpo should be in the gutter, there was a time when MSNBC was better but it is not now. WaPo should be in the gutter as well. Vox should be lower.

I agree with yours....one thing I find people forget is that in for example "The Guardian" paper, the opinion parts are extremely left to almost delusional left but when they are reporting the news they generally get it bang on and don't twist facts.

>>>>>>>Great in-depth source of news
Literally all organisations in your pic are driving an ridiculous agenda and are for the most part fake news.

It is seriously sickening how anyone can believe anything what "Vox" sais.

None of them can be taken seriously on there own, if you want even some resemblance of Truth you should read/watch:
A conservative news organization of your choice fox, etc.
A liberal but not ultra-liberal news organization NYT/guardian etc. .
And a foreign news organization eg. RT.

All organisations are completely liars and you have to do some filtering to find anything resembling truth.

>NYT
>WaPo
>CNN
>Centrist
Worthless, my dude.

lol, no fucking way. cuckservative detected...

Thank goodness deregulation makes everything better.

It's part of Two Party vicious cycle. FOX is fake news for stupid whites. CNN is fake news for stupid liberals. You think ((they)) will let you get Truth news? Stupid Americans being enslaved by few Roths. At least Hitler tried to do something. You are all being fucked in the ass by Roths and you don't know it yet.

Oudated. CNN moved to the left for example. It's generally becomming more polarized.

>Too cucked for your own flag

W
L

Somewhere between kill yourself and fuck off shill. Likely both

All of those Centre ones, bar WL, promote globalism and neoliberalism

The problem is that between the news sources, people are inundated with factoids that may or may not be "fully" correct or complete, and it is impossible to fully research all of the news that comes out in any given day.

Far fewer people should be in the business of "sharing" information that they have come across when they have not done even a cursory literature survey, but in the age of Facebook and Reddit we are encouraged to share shit that we haven't actually thought about.

You might be shitposting but Sup Forums and Twitter literally have a higher truth value than garbage like CNN and the Guardian.
The legacy media truly is nothing but oven fuel.

No need to be rude. :)

>NY Times
>AP
>NPR

>good sources of news

LOLOLOLOLOL

>theguardian
not algaic level shit
>breitbart
not analytical level
narrative under construction...

Well done

Absolute bullshit, most of these papers are treasonous leftist propaganda now.

The only thing about this that is true is that the Atlantic has a fairly high standard of both intel and analysis. It is fairly indepth, and for this reason the only one from the whole graph that I actually enjoy reading sometimes.

Reuters is correctly placed as "neutral", but the fact that the FOUL WaPost is at or above its level discredits the whole thing even further.