NEWS CHART

What news sources do you follow on this chart?

Me:
Reuters (High Quality/Neutral)
The Economist (High Quality/Neutral)
Vice News (Mixed Quality/Leans Left)
New York Times (High Quality/Leans Left)
Forbes (High Quality/Leans Right)
FT (High Quality/Neutral)
BBC News (High Quality/Leans Left)
The Hill (Mixed Quality/Leans Left)
The Atlantic (High Quality/Leans Left)
Wall Street Journal (High Quality/Leans Right)
ThinkProgress (Mixed Quality/Garbage Left)
MoveOn (Mixed Quality/Garbage Left)
The Daily Beast (High Quality/Hyper-Partisan Left)
Media Matters (High Quality/Hyper-Partisan Left)
The Guardian (Mixed Quality/Leans Left)
National Review (High Quality/Hyper-Partisan Right)
Real Clear Politics (High Quality/Leans Right)
The Young Turks (Mixed Quality/Hyper-Partisan Left)
NPR (High Quality/Leans Left)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/wM1_vQXVzIY
youtu.be/h8M5-Jc4ERk
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

This chart is garbage and was made by neoliberals
I get all my news from Sup Forums and the Daily Stormer like anyone who's truly enlightened

>drudge
>garbage right

I literally get all of my news from Sup Forums

>The Economist (High Quality/Neutral)

That explains some things

If anything, The Economist leans right, albeit establishment/corporate right. So I don't know what you're whining about.

How is The Economist unbiased ? You clearly do not read it.

I do read it, I just pointed out how it's biased here:
You seem to be under the weird impression that I made this chart, despite it being a meme for a very long fucking time. Welcome to Sup Forums, kiddo.

Zerohedge

The Young Turks, is much worse than Vox.
The Young Turks should be Very Poor Quality Garbage Tier. (below Info-Wars)

CNN & BBC are leaning more left lately.

I get my information from Sup Forums and small YouTube channels who do more research than companies worth billions of dollars.

Please name those small YouTube channels.

fpbp

>Reuters (High Quality/Neutral)
This is CNN lite.

Kill yourself faggot.

Sri Lanka huh?
What are you trying to shill for here?
we already know 90% of these organizations aren't factual news sources anymore.

I legit get all my news from Sup Forums. Don't even bother with anyone else. Usually this place is about 45 minutes to a hour faster than anyone else anyhow.

Reuters mostly

Local sources depending on the story

I used to also go to Al Jazeera but their site got really shitty after they launched Al Jazeera America.

I'm quite the news junkie. I listen to NPR almost every day, and I read different articles online from Forbes, The Wall Street Jorunal, the guardian, CNN, Fox News, the New York Times, and the Washington post every day. Sometimes I watch videos from Vox or Vice on Youtube.

Also I read my local city's newspaper every week, and tune in to my local university's public radio, which I go to. I'm a journalism student, and I actually work at the radio sometimes, but mostly I work on the campus paper and periodical journal. I have a nice voice, so someday I'd like to work for NPR.

Good luck in your dream user

Really?? Below INFOWARS?
Sounds like you've got a personal issue with them.

Just shows how Sup Forums has changed.

If you asked anyone here what the best new sources were 4 or 5 years ago it would of been Al Jazeera, Reuters, and The Guardian when they weren't so left wing

We are now the "newfags" for not worshiping fox news and info wars

>prioritizing speed over accuracy
except in special cases this makes little rational sense

Yeah that's why I'm building up my portfolio and getting a lot of experience in before graduating. Journalism is kind of a dying field, so only the best are left to compete for the few remaining new jobs. If I don't work my ass off, I'll be serving ventis at starbucks until I die.

It's not prioritizing speed over accuracy, it's just uncanny how quickly information about anything in the world gets here.

...

They shut down Al Jazeera America, thankfully. Shit was trash.

I still check AJ every other day or so. Same with WSJ, Reuters, The Hill, The Guardian (meh), The Economist, and LiveUAmap.

>Salon
>Bloomberg
>The NY times
>The Washington post
>Blacklivesmatter
higher quality than
>breitbart

You're seriously going all out on this b8 aren't you.

American intelligence media

Sup Forums for breaking news, right wing analysis and opinions
Reuters for topics Sup Forums doesn't care about and centre left analysis
Twitter for opinions

Helps that i have some journalism training so I'm practiced in reading past the bullshit.

>breitbart

higher quality than

>bloomberg

I get all my futures and commodities info from Breitbart every morning too. Cheers.

But the information posted here is often inaccurate and/or given a spin to serve the poster's goals

It was flat out b8.
I'm not saying Breitbart is higher quality.
I'm saying there is no way any of the ones I listed are higher quality than Breitbart.
They aren't, they are shit quality.
Salon is notoriously bad about article quality.

News is faster through Twitter and Sup Forums.
Going to websites is only good if you're looking at shit from days ago

>wall street journal "high quality" "leans right"
Kek

RT is my go to source for real news. The Daily Stormer to get a laugh.

So I caught you "acting" retarded. Are we still playing?

>I'm not saying Breitbart is higher quality
>I'm saying there is no way any of the ones I listed are higher quality than Breitbart
>So I'm saying Breitbart IS higher quality

>The Economist
>Neutral

Eradicate your gene pool from this planet pal

...

>the economist, financial times and USA Today
>neutral
gas yourself

>Salon
>high quality

JUST

BBC is hyper partisan friend

>Not mentioning Sup Forums for quality news
Kys

>when they weren't so left wing

This is why they are complete shit now. Reuters publishes just as much fake “Russian Collusion” News as CNN and WaPo. They’ve become a fucking tabloid like Newsweek and Time.

That chart is complete dogshit and it looks like it was made by a libfag

>RT
>low-quality
According to fucking who? I'm willing to accept someone claiming they're more biased, but no, the writing quality and journalist integrity is outstanding. That can't be criticized.

>muh horseshoe theory
kys

>That chart is complete dogshit and it looks like it was made by a libfag

It was

youtu.be/wM1_vQXVzIY


youtu.be/h8M5-Jc4ERk

(Vee can be a cuck sometimes but I listen to him for his opinions & experience with living under communism)

There are some others I watch but these are the main 2

>salon
>high quality
Thos whole chart is shit and op should commit suicide.

Huh, a dude was just asking me about how to debate better like an hour ago, and I posted a list of YouTube channels that's fucking CORNERSTONED by Styxhex.
I legit get fantasies about having the ability to rattle off obscure historical knowledge off-script like he does. It's not really a dream: I consider it a life goal. This guy, and DoctorRandomercam are the only people on the planet who have made my jaw drop from un-scripted oratory.

Alternet is actually pretty good at exposing countries atrocities

The only thing that somewhat consistently shows up in my feed is WaExaminer. That list is full of shill shit. AP and Reuters are not in the middle.

>salon
>high quality

Probably accurate to call you a newfag for that.