4 ms·

Reuters maybe? They actively try for neutral coverage. edit: But yeah, organizations of people with biases can't be perfectly neutral

• joshvm 9y ago
  Ideally, we'd all read something like Reuters or AP* . The problem is that because there isn't any bias, the stories tend to be quite dry. While that's great for impartiality, people get bored reading it. The BBC has a problem where they have to be impartial and non-accusatory, so articles are plagued with quote marks (e.g "The minister said he was 'shocked' "). The majority of people read the papers because they want to read something sensationalist from their point of view. * Actually what everyone should do is read a spectrum of papers from left to right wing. This avoids the bias problem because it becomes immediately obvious and it forces you to think about what the real story might be.