5 ms·

What are some media sources that we should be reading and listening to?

by cozuya 6y ago

nkurz 6y ago
I think the best hope is to cast a wide net, and hope that you can find sources that have complementary biases. You shouldn't avoid the mainstream US media, but you should be aware that many apparently independent sources share similar blindspots and prejudices. Within the US, I think a lot of the better writers are now working freelance and publishing on Substack: Glenn Greenwald, Matt Yglesias, and Bari Weiss come to mind. Outside the US, the Canadian, Australian, and British press sometimes have a different slant. Aljazeera often does investigative journalism with a different perspective. I haven't found any great single source in English, and don't read any other languages well enough to rely on them.
- taisalie 6y ago
  Reverse your comment. The obvious exit is non-English media, so get on that. English media is hostage to English Twitter which can't look away from the self-destruction of US/UK "first world" cultural and military hegemony. It's amazing how much non-English news reads/sounds like... news.
- cozuya 6y ago
  I see that we should "cast a wide net" by reading 3 noted anti-leftists. Who is your favorite author that identifies as a progressive?
  - nkurz 6y ago
    It's a wider net relative to reading only the mainstream US press (defined here as centered around NPR/CNN/NYT). Also, all of those strongly identify as leftists, just of a different strain than is currently dominant in the US media and Democratic party. Combining them with the mainstream, I feel like my real lack here is reliable conservative voices. I'm lacking good progressive voices that I trust. Rather, I trust many of them to give me a sense of where the Democratic party in the US is heading, but not to reliably report the strengths and weaknesses of their position. Freddie Deboer might be the closest that I come, and while he's arguably very progressive, he's not typical. Any suggestions? Edit: For non-media bloggers who touch on social issues, I'd suggest Andrew Gelman and Scott Aaronson as being good progressive voices. For media, I should have added Matt Taibbi, but he may also be in the very liberal but not-exactly-progressive camp.
    - cozuya 6y ago
      "all of those strongly identify as leftists" is telling. They are not leftists. Greenwald, in particular, who shows up on Fox News on a regular basis to attack leftists, is by far the most anti-leftist of any of the 6 names you've mentioned, but none of them will give you actual progressive views. None of these people will espouse things like raising the minimum wage, reducing our out of control military budget, or god forbid, universal healthcare for Americans. This is what modern progressives want and where the Democratic party is heading, eventually. No one cares about "cancel culture" or "SJWs" like you'll constantly read about with this list.
      - nkurz 6y ago
        > None of these people will espouse things like raising the minimum wage, reducing our out of control military budget, or god forbid, universal healthcare for Americans. Odd, I have completely the opposite impression. I support all of these things, and I would have guessed that all 7 people I named each support at least one and often all of these. I'd put them more on the losing Sanders side of the Democratic party, which I think has more support for the things you list than the currently dominant and more centrist Biden side. By contrast, I'd say it's the NPR/CNN/NYT voice that does not particularly support the things you list, at least not to the same extent. I could go through and try to pick out quotes to support this, but this probably wouldn't be persuasive. Instead, perhaps you could suggest some people that I should add to my reading list? I've given quite a few names that I think provide a useful contrast to the mainstream US media. Who else should I be reading to get a more complete picture? What are the trustworthy progressive sources, with "trustworthy" being defined as prioritizing things they believe are true over strategic communication?
        dragonwriter 6y ago
        > I’d put them more on the losing Sanders side of the Democratic party The progressive side of the party is not dominant but clearly ascendant over the last several years, and Greenwald’s attacks on the party have become more intense the more the progressive side has become more ascendant. Greenwald may have once been a progressive, but what he has clearly since become is simply an anti-Democrat whose entire schtick is performative leftism to try to drive a wedge between progressives and the Democratic Party.
SllX 6y ago
Whatever you want but skeptically and critically. If you think something in a report might be credible, it’s not a “fact”, it’s a “maybe”. If you want truth, stop buying news and use that time to study higher levels of mathematics beyond what you understand now. Honestly, just don’t buy news unless you’re in a position to profit from it.
hntrader 6y ago
Wikipedia's Current events page for general world news.
- hulitu 6y ago
  Wikipedia is very biased so should be taken with a bit of salt.
cableshaft 6y ago
The one I'm partial to is The Hill (specifically The Hill Rising on Youtube). Its two hosts, Krystal and Saagar, are a progressive and a conservative, but both are pro-working class and are willing to call out problems in their own parties (Saagar has been criticizing the GOP pretty hard lately). They'll also openly admit that they have biases.
jl2718 6y ago
Try anything anonymous and uncensored, and check what you find with your own research. I think you may be shocked by how much you’ve been lied to.
akarma 6y ago
You'll receive many more theoretical and abstract responses, so I'd like to offer a specific website instead: Christian Science Monitor (their news is unrelated to Christian Science). It's the only organization I've read that actually makes me think of journalism as opposed to news. They have an About page that they've very much followed [1]. Most of my friends who have checked out an article have ended up subscribing! [1] https://www.csmonitor.com/About https://www.csmonitor.com/About
raarts 6y ago
I trust Tim Pool to try to be as close to the truth as possible. He is very critical of most of the media as well.
- mahogany 6y ago
  > I trust Tim Pool to try to be as close to the truth as possible. Are we talking about the Tim Pool who thought Trump would win in a landslide, and who pushed the "little guy vs big guy" narrative of GME (even though the big guys made billions)? > He is very critical of most of the media as well. He embodies the very problem of the media: they want views over anything else so they resort to click bait and fear and outrage. I mean, just read his video titles...
- CyberDildonics 6y ago
  That's interesting, because you told someone that they thought january 6th was an insurrection only because of the media bubble they live in, but Tim Pool made a video titled: "Trump Supporters HAVE TAKEN OVER THE CAPITOL, Shots Fired INSIDE, Electoral Count Session ENDED" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0M8bginejxE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0M8bginejxE Which is it? Also if you look at his videos, every single one is lying in the title. This person is a living satire of clickbait and misinformation.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
fouric 6y ago
"Should"? I don't know. Anecdotally, I've been reading The New Paper[1] for a year or so now. They're concise, factual, and convenient, with extremely little (if any) bias. Their downsides are that they don't do any original reporting (they usually link to Reuters and AP articles) and that they don't cover that much stuff. Depending on how you define "media sources", TNP's lack of original reporting may disqualify them, but you may want to check them out anyway. [1] https://thenewpaper.co/ https://thenewpaper.co/

What are some media sources that we should be reading and listening to?

by cozuya 6y ago

What are some media sources that we should be reading and listening to?

I think the best hope is to cast a wide net, and hope that you can find sources that have complementary biases. You shouldn't avoid the mainstream US media, but you should be aware that many apparently independent sources share similar blindspots and prejudices. Within the US, I think a lot of the better writers are now working freelance and publishing on Substack: Glenn Greenwald, Matt Yglesias, and Bari Weiss come to mind. Outside the US, the Canadian, Australian, and British press sometimes have a different slant. Aljazeera often does investigative journalism with a different perspective. I haven't found any great single source in English, and don't read any other languages well enough to rely on them.

taisalie 6y ago
Reverse your comment. The obvious exit is non-English media, so get on that. English media is hostage to English Twitter which can't look away from the self-destruction of US/UK "first world" cultural and military hegemony. It's amazing how much non-English news reads/sounds like... news.
cozuya 6y ago
I see that we should "cast a wide net" by reading 3 noted anti-leftists. Who is your favorite author that identifies as a progressive?
- nkurz 6y ago
  It's a wider net relative to reading only the mainstream US press (defined here as centered around NPR/CNN/NYT). Also, all of those strongly identify as leftists, just of a different strain than is currently dominant in the US media and Democratic party. Combining them with the mainstream, I feel like my real lack here is reliable conservative voices. I'm lacking good progressive voices that I trust. Rather, I trust many of them to give me a sense of where the Democratic party in the US is heading, but not to reliably report the strengths and weaknesses of their position. Freddie Deboer might be the closest that I come, and while he's arguably very progressive, he's not typical. Any suggestions? Edit: For non-media bloggers who touch on social issues, I'd suggest Andrew Gelman and Scott Aaronson as being good progressive voices. For media, I should have added Matt Taibbi, but he may also be in the very liberal but not-exactly-progressive camp.
  - cozuya 6y ago
    "all of those strongly identify as leftists" is telling. They are not leftists. Greenwald, in particular, who shows up on Fox News on a regular basis to attack leftists, is by far the most anti-leftist of any of the 6 names you've mentioned, but none of them will give you actual progressive views. None of these people will espouse things like raising the minimum wage, reducing our out of control military budget, or god forbid, universal healthcare for Americans. This is what modern progressives want and where the Democratic party is heading, eventually. No one cares about "cancel culture" or "SJWs" like you'll constantly read about with this list.
    - nkurz 6y ago
      > None of these people will espouse things like raising the minimum wage, reducing our out of control military budget, or god forbid, universal healthcare for Americans. Odd, I have completely the opposite impression. I support all of these things, and I would have guessed that all 7 people I named each support at least one and often all of these. I'd put them more on the losing Sanders side of the Democratic party, which I think has more support for the things you list than the currently dominant and more centrist Biden side. By contrast, I'd say it's the NPR/CNN/NYT voice that does not particularly support the things you list, at least not to the same extent. I could go through and try to pick out quotes to support this, but this probably wouldn't be persuasive. Instead, perhaps you could suggest some people that I should add to my reading list? I've given quite a few names that I think provide a useful contrast to the mainstream US media. Who else should I be reading to get a more complete picture? What are the trustworthy progressive sources, with "trustworthy" being defined as prioritizing things they believe are true over strategic communication?
      - dragonwriter 6y ago
        > I’d put them more on the losing Sanders side of the Democratic party The progressive side of the party is not dominant but clearly ascendant over the last several years, and Greenwald’s attacks on the party have become more intense the more the progressive side has become more ascendant. Greenwald may have once been a progressive, but what he has clearly since become is simply an anti-Democrat whose entire schtick is performative leftism to try to drive a wedge between progressives and the Democratic Party.

SllX 6y ago

Whatever you want but skeptically and critically. If you think something in a report might be credible, it’s not a “fact”, it’s a “maybe”. If you want truth, stop buying news and use that time to study higher levels of mathematics beyond what you understand now. Honestly, just don’t buy news unless you’re in a position to profit from it.

hntrader 6y ago

Wikipedia's Current events page for general world news.

hulitu 6y ago
Wikipedia is very biased so should be taken with a bit of salt.

cableshaft 6y ago

The one I'm partial to is The Hill (specifically The Hill Rising on Youtube). Its two hosts, Krystal and Saagar, are a progressive and a conservative, but both are pro-working class and are willing to call out problems in their own parties (Saagar has been criticizing the GOP pretty hard lately). They'll also openly admit that they have biases.

jl2718 6y ago

Try anything anonymous and uncensored, and check what you find with your own research. I think you may be shocked by how much you’ve been lied to.

akarma 6y ago

You'll receive many more theoretical and abstract responses, so I'd like to offer a specific website instead: Christian Science Monitor (their news is unrelated to Christian Science). It's the only organization I've read that actually makes me think of journalism as opposed to news. They have an About page that they've very much followed [1]. Most of my friends who have checked out an article have ended up subscribing! [1] https://www.csmonitor.com/About https://www.csmonitor.com/About

raarts 6y ago

I trust Tim Pool to try to be as close to the truth as possible. He is very critical of most of the media as well.

mahogany 6y ago
> I trust Tim Pool to try to be as close to the truth as possible. Are we talking about the Tim Pool who thought Trump would win in a landslide, and who pushed the "little guy vs big guy" narrative of GME (even though the big guys made billions)? > He is very critical of most of the media as well. He embodies the very problem of the media: they want views over anything else so they resort to click bait and fear and outrage. I mean, just read his video titles...
CyberDildonics 6y ago
That's interesting, because you told someone that they thought january 6th was an insurrection only because of the media bubble they live in, but Tim Pool made a video titled: "Trump Supporters HAVE TAKEN OVER THE CAPITOL, Shots Fired INSIDE, Electoral Count Session ENDED" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0M8bginejxE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0M8bginejxE Which is it? Also if you look at his videos, every single one is lying in the title. This person is a living satire of clickbait and misinformation.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

fouric 6y ago

"Should"? I don't know. Anecdotally, I've been reading The New Paper[1] for a year or so now. They're concise, factual, and convenient, with extremely little (if any) bias. Their downsides are that they don't do any original reporting (they usually link to Reuters and AP articles) and that they don't cover that much stuff. Depending on how you define "media sources", TNP's lack of original reporting may disqualify them, but you may want to check them out anyway. [1] https://thenewpaper.co/ https://thenewpaper.co/