features stories on ‘Human Rights’ ‘Diversity’ and ‘Social Justice’ from around the globe… :yinyang:
[quote=“TainanCowboy”]The Breitbart group of web sites offer a good compilation of material from around the world. You can US or World choices on news/weather/etc. what topic you wish to see the latest about. Either text or video offerings.
can someone post some of the better websites for news in Taiwan? right now I just go to yahoo.com.tw for taiwan news…I don’t think it’s very good, can someone recommend me some sites? tahnkss
[quote]Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Wednesday that Al Jazeera is gaining more prominence in the U.S. because it offers “real news”–something she said American media were falling far short of doing.
Clinton was speaking before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and she said the U.S. is losing the “information war” in the world. One of the reasons she cited for this was the quality of channels like Al Jazeera.
“Viewership of Al Jazeera is going up in the United States because it’s real news,” she said. “You may not agree with it, but you feel like you’re getting real news around the clock instead of a million commercials and, you know, arguments between talking heads and the kind of stuff that we do on our news which, you know, is not particularly informative to us, let alone foreigners.”[/quote]
Probably why it was vilified and bombed by the US gov’t not so long ago.
Cool thread. Just a note but I’m surprised how many posts include the bbc. There is nothing reliable about the bbc, it is extremely biased, inaccurate, show exactly and only what they want… on all news from internal politics and affairs (London riots are a prime example of how biased they are) to all international, I won’t go into detais of comparing what it says with other newspapers but I used to do that a lot when I lived in England and its shocking what they get away with. Also being a scientist I can say that the health and science sections are appaling and twist discoveries and facts to the extent they are incredibly misleading and sometimes lying.
I haven’t found anything thats global and nonbiased but if you can understand Greek I quite like newsbeast.gr/ cause it seems to put everythign and anything up so you get conflicting articles next to each other with different opinions.
A NEWS site with a little something for almost everyone - News, Sports, Videos, links to world-wide news & info sites.
(also some live streaming of hard-to-find U.S.A. TV news & sports channels)
Most of those sources are not news, they’re indoctrination. I have very little tolerance for the left right paradigm these days. But to each their own.
If you get it from both sides, it cancels out, leaving you with a headache. But eventually you learn to filter the BS and see through to an approximation of truth.
Or… lesser minds tune out one side and lounge in the echo chamber of their favored side.
I got some left wing indoctrination growing up. It didn’t take.
“The Economist”, for even-handedness.
From a recent book review: “Almost all the blacks in his book are victims, almost all the whites villains. This is not history; it is advocacy.”
The preceding sentence:“Mr Baptist has not written an objective history of slavery,”
Book Title:“The Half Has Never Been Told: Slavery and the Making of American Capitalism”
In reviewing a book on slavery in the United States, the (anonymous, and today probably very glad of the Economist’s policy that way) reviewer feels the author has been unfair in painting black people as victims and white people as bad guys.
The Economist: proudly rejecting left-wing doctrine.
Yeah, the “on the other hand” approach went rather overboard on that one. But at least they’ve apologized about it:
Mild kudos as well for the clarity of the apology. None of the all-too-common “We apologize for people interpreting our words in a different way than they were intended” or whatever the boilerplate has become.
Well, this talk about reliable news is a canard, as I think we all can see. ‘Reliable’ is a weaselly way of saying ‘credible’, and credibility is subjective. So here’s some information of a more useful kind:
There. Now we can all decide whom to believe, without any pretentions of objectivity.
Also… note the clustering. The center-right part of the spectrum is poorly served. There are those who make a big deal of how Fox News trounces others in the ratings. Are they outcompeting? This chart suggests that they don’t directly compete at all. Some more insights on that angle at:
I’ve known some tolerant liberals, but they are few and far between. Most of them make me mindful that the first progressive movement in America was the Puritans. How far they have come… and yet in many ways not far at all.
[quote=“rowland”]Well, this talk about reliable news is a canard, as I think we all can see. ‘Reliable’ is a weaselly way of saying ‘credible’, and credibility is subjective. So here’s some information of a more useful kind:
There. Now we can all decide whom to believe, without any pretentions of objectivity.
Also… note the clustering. The center-right part of the spectrum is poorly served. There are those who make a big deal of how Fox News trounces others in the ratings. Are they outcompeting? This chart suggests that they don’t directly compete at all. Some more insights on that angle at:
I’ve known some tolerant liberals, but they are few and far between. Most of them make me mindful that the first progressive movement in America was the Puritans. How far they have come… and yet in many ways not far at all.[/quote]
[/quote]