Is there a place where I can get unbiased news?

Is there a place where I can get unbiased news?
I just want to be informed, not hear opinions. Is there a news show, station or website that is neither left nor right?

Other urls found in this thread:

bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_novedades.htm#april2017
porkinspolicyreview.com/category/porkins-policy-radio/
profcj.org
corbettreport.com
youtube.com/user/LarkenRose
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

what you are describing is editorializing, and no. it's essentially impossible now.

i really like this site which is by no means perfect, but a lot less shitty than just about any other news site

reason.com

it's biased towards reality, which is what you want

Problem Goy?

Alex Jones and freedomain radio are where I get my news and advice. Breitbart is pretty based too

bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_novedades.htm#april2017

You are an idiot. There is no such thing as objectivity when it comes to news. This has nothing to with a bias, but rather that every piece of information that is handed to you in any way by any medium has been worked on by someone else. Even a cameraangles may have influence on "bias".

Just use different (biased) sources and try to make up your own mind, or don't.

>Alex Jones and freedomain radio are where I get my news and advice. Breitbart is pretty based too
hello Sup Forums

Alex Jones is a meme and not real news. Breitbart is ok but don't make it your main news source.

No. All views are by definition partial in some way.

The BBC is trustworthy and fairly neutral

trips don't lie. Nonetheless, this user is right.

The BBC is biased to fuck.

As a conservative, the best middle lane closest to unbiased I get is the Philip Defranco Show. A little left leaning, but he acknowledges it and tries to just give facts

Kek and freedomain is basically a cult
>I wasn't being serious

>>I wasn't being serious
Yeah, but plenty of people unironically think Alex Jones is redpill Jesus

Try full spectrum survival on YouTube, posts a 3-4 min video on weekdays explain the news and has heaps of other survival content on his channel.

Create your own opinion. Watch the same international story, first on biased BBC, then on biased RT. Somewhere in the middle is your unbiased answer.

Doesn't exist since bias is part of it and marketing.

Agree with this here

I think his new news network will be fantastic as well and I have high hopes it will be across the political spectrum of people on the show too.

Alex Jones is = to The Daily show

>Guy asking for traditional journalism
>gets called an idiot
way to go user

What really happened.com

RT

/r/conspiracy

Op here
thanks guys, I am actually learning shit.

I am calling him an idiot, because he thinks it is even remotely possible for unbiased information to be passed to him.

Been watching news hour on PBS for a couple months. No ads, no emotional fear mongering, no one sided arguments (opposing views are usually given calmly by a trump advisor, and a Democrat). It's a bit on he boring side, but I think that's how news should be. Plus on the PBS website it's free..

All extremely biased sources with no facts.

I usually go with AP or Reuters. News services like that tend to actually be just the bare facts with little to no editorializingto any effective degree. Also nice because a lot of bigger news orgs that do slant tend to get their news from these services anyway, so if you do you're ahead of the game

FoxNews

Its the only news source that can legally say they are Fair and Balanced.

>what you should know
>a bunch of libshit hysterics

jesus christ, the person who made that list was a hardcore proggie and probably a no-fun-allowed permavirgin to boot

Seconded, I go to them a lot for unbiased stuff

Die in a fireplace.

Haha, conspiracy - yes. The others, maybe you should check them out before dismissing them.

>Alex Jones
The guy have been a joke way before you underage fags came along.and boy i was a full conspiracy fanatic back in the day.

I really think it's important to have some sort of accredited news. Many of the things listed here as "news" are not accredited news sources, so they can claim anything in the name of entertainment. For instance in a plight to see his kids again Alex Jones said his personae is an act. Whether or not his news is true, he has to know how damaging and fearmongering it is, or he wouldn't have tried to pretend he's he is someone else off camera.

I used to listen to alex for years cause hes. your buddy and doenst afraid of anything.
Well came to the conclusion hes a showman for bucks and power,note how he shills. when jack blood and other partners left him i took notice.

...

Impossible but i feel you bro im also tired of all this left and right bullshit i can't even read a newspaper anymore without pushing me to one side or the other.

That's a fine opinion, and philosophically interesting, but it's not realistic. The reality is it's possible to convey the rough details of events in such a way that isn't political in any direction, and some services do that. To claim otherwise is to claim that language is incapable of conveying truth, which looking at our technological history can't be true. A ton of our most impressive inventions' births have depended on the successful conveyance of truth, and they exist now, so it must have happened.

People like to repeat "they're all political" as an excuse to be lazy and not critically evaluate their news sources, but unfortunately that's not reality. By accepting that idea you're accepting being lied to, and only because you can't be bothered to question it.

...

...

Mark Twain pointed out that "If you don't read the news, you're un-informed. If you do read the news, you're mis-informed."

NPR also has some great, non emotional content. I've found out about so many interesting things via Npr. And their tiny desk you tube series is amazing. I hated t pain until I saw his tiny desk performance.

Its good to look at all sides and figutre the truth is somewhere in the middle.
I read alternet and Freerepublic i watch BBC ,german and french news a little fox (as much as i can stand) Democracy Now is a superliberal outlet but they do thier homework and stick up for vets. I find Tom Hartmann to ba a balanced show he has repulblicans all the time on his show and is a author opf many books on Jefferson. Look if someone is putting too much emotion into delivery suspect them.

NRK is pretty decent, but it's only in Norwegian.

news is useless if have no grasp on history

Mark Twain lived in a time where all the newspapers were independently owned by Rich barons who hoped to politically influence the public to further their own fortunes.

Which is the same today, only news services exist who aren't owned by anyone, and you don't have to live close to them to hear them thanks to the Internet

Yeah Samuel clemmens had some great one liners, but using a quip about the news of the late 1800's in relationship to the news of today seems less pragmatic than finding an accurate, non biased news source.

porkinspolicyreview.com/category/porkins-policy-radio/
profcj.org
corbettreport.com

>reason.com

Libtard Biased

Everything not in their taste is called "socialism", even Bush and Trump

>reason.com
Thanks, I'll check it out.
I should have mentioned that I get some of my info from what appears to be a similar website, IJR (Independent Journal Review)
But I do use different (biased) sources, mostly just wondering what you guys check out.

News are nothing but tomorrow's history.

following situation:
>dead man, slavic nationality, 25 years old, got shot but nothing was stolen

Unbiased news would be:
>Slavic man aged 25 was shot, nothing was stolen

See? unbiased news

youtube.com/user/LarkenRose
good place to get some backbone so that you are not fooled by the simplest tricks

>Everything not in their taste is called "socialism", even Bush and Trump
yeah that's not even remotely true. nice try though.

you are welcome user

CNN is a reliable news source

Unbiased news would be:
>A man aged 25 was shot, nothing was stolen

Why is nationality so important ?

Al Jazeera? It's where I get all my news from.
Probably pretty biased though

This. NPR is my mainstay.

All cable news channels are bunk. News shouldn't require a cable subscription, and none of the major media outlets really make a lot of money from their news divisions compared to their other interests.

This.

The PBS Newshour is the best. Real fucking journalism. Judy Woodruff is a constant professional, Hari Sreenivasan is real cool. all the correspondents are good too.

MARK SHIELDS!!

Also check out Charlie Rose.

>Al Jazeera
>Probably pretty biased though
>Probably

Al Jazeera is fine, idiots just can't get over any name that sounds like durka durka.

It's not about the name you moron.

I do watch them, and fox to get kind of a 'both sides' thing going.
I'm old enough to remember the days of Peter Jennings, Larry King, Ted Koppel, Walter Cronkite, Tom Brokaw, David Brinkley, Ed Bradley, Diane Sawyer, Andy Rooney and Dan Rather.
Kind of miss that shit.

How bout instead of watching 2 biased news sources, you just watch one unbiased one? Like the PBS Newshour.

Euronews.

The
Best.

Reddit.com

narnia, unfortunately the news only covers events in narnia

I mean it guys. PBS is the best. I just remembered that i'm wearing my PBS shirt right now.

Check out Snopes.com for clear facts. Not exactly a news site but a great tool for gettin the full story on a topic

For every issue and event, I read an article from Vice and then an article from The Daily Wire. Then I see which parts overlap and that is something close to the truth.

It fucking sucks that this is how it has to be in 2017 and even CNN is really fucking biased. If the left outlets report on an issue and the right outlets don't write anything about it, it's probably just a smear campaign or not important.

Except when the government issues a D notice.
Got a cabinet member who enjoys raping kids ? Got GCHQ and the NSA conducting illegal spying on an industrial scale ? Not to worry, we'll just issue a D notice and the BBC won't be reporting on it. There is a reason why the UK just dropped to 40th in the press freedom rankings.

Hahahahaha- snopes is truth

www.rt.com
It's certainly as neutral (or in my opinion moreso) as any of the main 'Western' news outlets. So, if you can't find a truly impartial site maybe just read both sides of the propaganda ?

You can find Larry King now on RT. He's been there for years!

RT does what the Us media does. Points out flaws in opposing countries. If you want to know what's wrong with the US, you need to get outside of the western media realm.

No, that would be selective news, dumbass. His being Slavic is a fact, just like his age or his gender, there is nothing biased about it.
On the other hand reporting that he was probably killed because he was a dirty Slav, now that would not be a fact, that would be biased speculation. Are we understanding yet?

There is a difference between
>A local man was shot today
and
>A local man was shot today, yet another in a stream of increased gun violence

News and bias do not always have to come together.

Just google it and look at many differing sources ya dingus. News, as soon as it extends beyond being writing on a paper that states what events took place without leaving anything out is inherently biased. Hell, even the mere choice on what events a newspaper reports on is an expression of bias. There's no escape from ideology.

RT is state run. End of story.

What in the Us isn't? If it's claimed to be independent - check again.

Xinhua News or CCTV

Breitbart is basically pants on fire

Ok, Dmitry.

obligatory zizek

Not saying RT isn't, just hate when others assume Western media has their hands clean and puts their viewers first over corporate interest.

No, at the time being your best bet is to watch the two sides, like fox news and cnn, and figure out what the facts are yourself. It sucks and damn near impossible to get the two sides, because it may not be covered, but it's about the only way you can get it as it stands.

Basically nowhere. Every human alive, even you who are trying your best to get the facts are bias.

The scientific method and experimentation even has steps and techniques to avoid a researcher's bias.

Every journalist will always have their world view spin on things.

Its up to you to analyze the facts from actual experts, see what the consensus is (consensus is what all studies and data point to.. Not an expert's opinion) and make up your own mind as best you can.

Also if something makes you angry or in any way emotional, then watch out.. Because your view on it is likely going to be warped..

In Canada we have cbc. Theyre pretty good about presenting both left and right views. They get called liberal propoganda and bias all the time but thats because conservatives seem to be on a bender with that lately. Anything that disagrees with them is fake news.

Both my father and I listen read and love and were on totally opposite sides of the spectrum. And even though im liberal, i hear plenty of stories from them about our current liberal provincial government (who is very terrible..) using liberal propoganda and lies to maintain votes in the next election. And i agreed with them. That's not all either. I hear a pretty far right story out of them several times a week and they host real experts and actual economists.. Not alex jones characters. Pretty eye opening at times.

Pretty far right stuff or a total liberal propoganda news source, huh?

State run is state run. If US news was anything like RT, they wouldn't be criticising the administration like a good free press should. Bias due to corporate interest is different, but if that bothers you then RT should be vile to you.

They pick and chose their criticism. Real journalism is dead and everyone parrots what's handed down as the narrative. I feel like if your news source talks at all about celebs, then it's not news worthy. It's all a distraction. All too media outlets are corrupt, but everyone needs to see all sides. I regularly checkout SANA, PressTV, RT.... all the places America has problems with to hear their side.

Unless the individuals involved work really hard to be nutural or if there's a balanced amout of individuals moderating stories before they're published for bias, but I could be overly optimistic and hope that it's still possible.

user, Russia Today is purely a propaganda outlet run directly by the Russian government. You don't get worse than that. If you want to come up with all the ways another outlet can theoretically be worse go right ahead, but you're just obscuring the basis premise of this conversation.

Yeah, but it is clearly also bias. All of these media types go to universities full of Marxist and Jew scum. They are taught by them, this is then expressed in their coverage and story selection.

Plz b b8 n not sum moron that believes this

After getting out the Marines years ago 2010, I've been reading nothing but news and over the years I've seen more truth on RT than the US. Your world view is different than mine but my global travel and going to war has taught me to keep an open mind to everything. RT gives more truth in western entities and their hegemony. But when it comes to Russian affairs - I see their propaganda push. Grain of salt everything but listen to all. Then use reason to find your truth because there are lies everywhere.

noagendashow.com

brety fugin grate

That's a great story. I guess changing the subject is fine. Goodbye.

buncha globalist elite fucks

>amout of individuals moderating stories before they're published for bias
>amount of individuals moderating for bias before a story is published
fuck I suck at English

>people not recognising this as bait

Is Sup Forums's reputation really THAT bad?

I didnt think I changed it - elaborated more on my point. That's it. I enjoyed the chat. Best to you

if you can find me an obviously factually incorrect Snopes right now, I will believe anything else you say.

Go for it.