case: (Default)
Case ([personal profile] case) wrote in [community profile] fandomsecrets2014-01-06 06:49 pm

[ SECRET POST #2561 ]


⌈ Secret Post #2561 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.
[Breaking Bad]


__________________________________________________



03.
[The Hobbit]


__________________________________________________



04.
[Monster]


__________________________________________________



05.
[Hannibal]


__________________________________________________



06.
[Law and Order SVU]


__________________________________________________



07.
[GTA V]


__________________________________________________



08.
[Meitantei no Okite]


__________________________________________________



09.
[The Big Bang Theory]















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 043 secrets from Secret Submission Post #366.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Unbiased news sources

(Anonymous) 2014-01-07 02:55 am (UTC)(link)
I've been looking around and haven't found any news sources that focus solely on news (no top 10 or what your husband doesn't tell you nonsense) or isn't noticeably biased, leaves out important info, or jumps the gun and doesn't fact check.

What do you guys use?

Re: Unbiased news sources

(Anonymous) 2014-01-07 03:05 am (UTC)(link)
I read the Washington Post, mostly because I go to college in DC and want good local news in the same place as good national news. It's perhaps a little left-tilted, but not as left-tilted as the New York Times, I believe, and has a mix of liberal and conservative op-ed contributors. 'Course, they just set up a paywall for new subscribers, so even online you only get 20 free articles a month (but you can refresh and scan the front page as much as you want).

For free news sources, I'd recommend NPR's Morning Edition. You can listen to it online if a car (or home) radio isn't handy, and they also have apps you can use if you have a smartphone.

Re: Unbiased news sources

(Anonymous) 2014-01-07 03:10 am (UTC)(link)
It's not perfect, but BBC World News isn't terrible.

Re: Unbiased news sources

(Anonymous) 2014-01-07 03:22 am (UTC)(link)
I don't think there are many sources like that anymore - because the things that you've ruled out are (it seems to me) pretty much the things that allow you to make money.

That said, I mostly use the BBC and the Guardian (although I don't think all too highly of their journalistic standards, they're both convenient and not horribly stupid), and then a variety of somewhat partisan sources for political news.

Re: Unbiased news sources

(Anonymous) 2014-01-07 03:28 am (UTC)(link)
All news sources do that in one way or another. The best thing to do is have more than one source so you can compare.

Re: Unbiased news sources

(Anonymous) 2014-01-07 03:37 am (UTC)(link)
All news sources tend to do that stuff, particularly since we live in a 24 hour news cycle [for the latter one].

I mostly look at the local paper, which over all tends to be slightly tilted left, then go online and look at a source that's tilted just a little to the right if it's a topic I'm particularly interested in - just to get the facts from both sides/minimize the facts that left out on purpose.
chardmonster: (Default)

Re: Unbiased news sources

[personal profile] chardmonster 2014-01-07 04:00 am (UTC)(link)
Unbiased news sources don't exist, period. News is generated by human beings, who are inherently biased. What we say constitutes "news" is in itself a biased decision. There is inherently some bias involved when we make the decision as to what constitutes "unbiased" news.

If you're in the US, the only thing I can suggest is CSPAN.

Re: Unbiased news sources

(Anonymous) 2014-01-07 04:19 am (UTC)(link)
I get that and assumed most of the members here would get that too if they made recommendations. I figured that shortening the title to three words, even if it is somewhat imprecise, would get the general point across and using noticeably biased in the actual post would imply that I didn't want something like Huffpost, Jezebel, or Fox. Though, in retrospect, nonpartisan would have been a better term.

And thanks!

Re: Unbiased news sources

(Anonymous) 2014-01-07 04:08 am (UTC)(link)
My local news people are actually pretty great. Not the newspapers, mind you, but the news on our NBC channel are good and manage to be pretty unbiased in their reporting. Nobody is ever fully unbiased, but they do a good job. Oh, and they cover world news, it's not just local news it's just a local channel. Hope that makes sense.

Re: Unbiased news sources

(Anonymous) 2014-01-07 04:41 am (UTC)(link)
+1 - though I'd say that for my local newspaper. Whenever they do come down [or praise something] they always at least try to bring up the opposite side's stance in a way that represents their points fairly.
caerbannog: (Default)

Re: Unbiased news sources

[personal profile] caerbannog 2014-01-07 06:59 am (UTC)(link)
Twitter, mostly because I want to find out about, say, a random protest down the road or a car crash and The Current/Breaking news part of news websites? Not so current.