3 ms·

I agree, it’s pretty easy to end up in a place where you don’t trust any source of news. Not sure that’s really a bad thing. I still read the New York Times (t

I agree, it’s pretty easy to end up in a place where you don’t trust any source of news. Not sure that’s really a bad thing. I still read the New York Times (though I’m no longer a paying subscriber). I don’t think they are as untrustworthy as like, Newsmax or Info Wars or what have you. I just typically prefer the Washington Post or WSJ (sans crazy WSJ op-eds) since it’s hard to unsee the NYT slant in everything lately and I find their shrillness and shamelessness exhausting.

drewbug01 6y ago
Yeah - I think “not trusting” is healthy as long as it stays in the realm of skepticism ... and doesn’t cross over into “I now get all my news from random Youtubers.” Which... sadly happens sometimes. :( I don’t have much of a preference between the NYT and WaPo as far as “trustworthiness” goes, but the point about their different voices is interesting to me. They absolutely do have very different voices. I actually don’t care for either one of them! But ... thinking about it - I feel like perhaps some have trouble with a news organizations “voice” and general perspective on the world - and can’t distinguish that voice or perspective from the reporting. My gut says that this is a critical reading skill that is perhaps not as common with some people, and it leads them to think a source isn’t trustworthy. > sans crazy WSJ op-eds What?! The op-eds are where you go when you want to read crazy things for entertainment! Where else can you get that kind of fun?! (I jest, of course).