5 ms·

I used to really like CNN back in like 2010. Over the years its just become worse and worse to the point I don't read it anymore. It's basically turned into gos

I used to really like CNN back in like 2010. Over the years its just become worse and worse to the point I don't read it anymore. It's basically turned into gossip news and is constantly skewing reality in favor of profits. I'm over it, and I think most other people are as well.

xkbarkar 5y ago
Anecdotally yeah. Agree. To me cnn is the exact same garbage as fox. Just leftist instead of rightist. I never click on any links to either media. Actually I used to line the guardian but in the past two years the quality of their reporting also just went alarmist and hyperbolic. In some cases blatantly inaccurate. Looking for a good news source currenty that arent afraid of critizicing any political party and their actions.
- oldmanhorton 5y ago
  I think Shepherd Smith on CNBC is generally pretty good. He definitely does some entertainment and "feel good" stories but for the most part there's less commentary and opinion than most other cable news.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- g42gregory 5y ago
  Jonathan Turley, Glenn Greenwald.
  - lampshades 5y ago
    > Glenn Greenwald Who is actually on Fox quite a bit these days, funnily enough. 15-25 year old me would have laughed in disbelief, but if I decide to turn on cable news these days, I turn on Fox. Edit: Also, Whitney Webb at Mint Press News is very good, just to throw her in the ring.
    - tootie 5y ago
      Greenwald is going on Tucker Carlson and reciting Kremlin propaganda without any evidence. Russian state media has been gleefully quoting the two of them. https://www.theguardian.com/media/2022/mar/18/ukrainian-bioweapons-labs-qanon-fox-news https://www.theguardian.com/media/2022/mar/18/ukrainian-biow...
  - tootie 5y ago
    Greenwald is absolutely off the deep end. Being brave enough to criticize orthodoxy is only laudable if the orthodoxy is actually wrong. Greenwald hasn't backed down from any of his nonsense takes on the Ukraine war no matter how wrong he is.
- cableshaft 5y ago
  Breaking Points is a good option: https://www.youtube.com/c/breakingpoints https://www.youtube.com/c/breakingpoints They do have their own biases, but the dynamic is more conservative that hates the direction the GOP is going in (Saagar) and liberal progressive who is not a fan of the Democratic establishment (Krystal). As such neither one hesitates to call out what they disagree with for both Republicans and Democrats. They have an optional subscription service that is doing extremely well. CNN should have consulted them for how to set up their premium service, because they have it figured out. Most of their content is free to the public in segments, but you get an unedited full stream unlisted Youtube link if you pay (plus some extra back and forth commentary), as well as bonus segments every week that are unlisted as well. Being independent also makes it so they're not afraid to speak their mind about things either. There's a few things they like to cover repeatedly that I really don't care about personally, and I don't always agree with their views on certain issues, but there's always a few things I like to hear their take on.
  - padobson 5y ago
    more conservative that hates the direction the GOP is going I've heard other people say this, but I've never heard Saagar say anything I thought was conservative. He's not paleocon or libertarian because he's comfortable with big domestic government programs. He's not neocon because he spends a lot of time attacking big banks and big tech and he has been very critical of foreign military interventions. I've never heard him take a position on socially conservative issues like abortion or gay marriage. So what am I missing?
    - AdamJacobMuller 5y ago
      > what am I missing? It's very hard to define people who don't fit inside the normal blue-vs-red spectrum. It's really hard to define people who don't fit into an easy quadrant on the political compass test.
- TooKool4This 5y ago
  An hour of PBS Newshour a day. Very much fact based reporting with maybe a slight left leaning bias. Digest it and move on and live your life. Besides that, I just turn off the news spigot. I'm slowly coming to the realization that watching news was kind of becoming my version of watching reality TV shows. There is of course value in being informed but outside of that, a single person can't meaningfully take action on all the things being reported on. So I see less and less reason to keep up with the news besides just being generally informed. I think a better way to consume news might be to get a few "general" news tidbits through your regular news outlets. And then get more focused news on topics you personally care about and are willing to take action on through non-traditional news outlets.
  - lampshades 5y ago
    > with maybe a slight left leaning bias As someone with a conservative leaning bias, I would consider PBS to have a very strong left (whatever that means) leaning bias. I guess it depends on your start point.
    - tootie 5y ago
      It has been said the reality has a liberal bias.
      - jaywalk 5y ago
        ...by people who have a liberal bias.
        uoaei 5y ago
        That's not really a helpful point. You've introduced a tautology. People who rely on faithful, factual descriptions of reality would be liberals if reality had a liberal bias and they interpreted reality accurately.
        jaywalk 5y ago
- gnicholas 5y ago
  Reason.com is a libertarian source whose coverage and perspective does not align with the Dem or Repub parties.
  - uoaei 5y ago
    "Not-red/not-blue agenda" is different from "no-agenda".
    - gnicholas 5y ago
      Every news source has an agenda. GP was asking for news sources that are not afraid to criticize political parties, and they are not. They even have a range of libertarian views, and they criticize each other/the libertarian party.
      - uoaei 5y ago
        There are plenty others too. Many go further, to criticize corporations and even bare narratives! Below is a small sample, and none are aligned with any party in particular. Center for Public Integrity Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting (FAIR) Novara Media (UK-based) scheerpost.org (Chris Hedges's main outlet) Citations Needed Truthout.org In These Times Evonomics naked capitalism
        gnicholas 5y ago
        Are any of these not aligned with the far-left? I didn't check them all, but none of them seems to be to the center of the Dems on the issues they cover. Perhaps I didn't dig deep enough? It's possible that the commenter was asking for Dem/Repub-critical sources that are all aligned with one pole, but I interpreted the question as asking for sources whose coverage would not correlate with either party. If you're going to criticize Reason for having an agenda, I would say that critique would apply equally to these sources as well. They seem very agenda driven (which doesn't make them bad)!
        5y ago
- rayiner 5y ago
  My wife listens to Bloomberg or CNBC. It’s news for rich people who want an accurate analysis of reality because they have money in the market. E.g. I listened to some segments just before the recent Virginia/New Jersey elections and it was just the facts, not teeth gnashing about how the wrong side might win.
- room505 5y ago
  I like reading The Bulwark, The Dispatch and Lawfare Blog. All seem centrist and have indepth information.
thunderbird120 5y ago
The rise of the internet has not been kind to general purpose journalism. To stay alive news businesses are essentially required to cover specific things in specific ways which maximize capturing people's attention.
mxuribe 5y ago
I haven't watched CNN via TV for years, mostly because i cut the "normal TV" cord years ago. Although back when i did have regular and cable TV, i actually liked it the best as far as Tv News was concerned. For several years now, i have simply subscribed to their daily "5 Things" email newsletter...which aims to give a brief top 5 things one should know. It started out amazing; helping me get the gist for top headliones all while being really short and succinct. Over the years, the amount of content in each daily issue has grown both in content and ads, which i can understand becuase they are still a for-profit business after all...and it is still brief enough for me to skim through every morning. Oh, and its free, so while it does ppiont links to their cnn.com website (which is a different awful beast of advertising hell), i feel that its worth it...and in fact, sort of the kind of reason why i liklely would never subsrcibe to this CNN+ type of subcription.
uoaei 5y ago
The last time I watched CNN it seemed like their writing staff was replaced with unscrupulous psychologists intent on plucking every heart-string they can reach.
silisili 5y ago
Yeah, Fox and CNN - at least their websites, have both become little more than he-said she-said tweet screenshots. I don't use Twitter for a reason, but now I have to see the garbage anyways. At least Fox sometimes has recipes in the comments of Twitter news stories.
rayiner 5y ago
Man you missed CNN in the early 1990s. I used to watch Larry King interviews with my dad. He was so normal and direct and human.
- tyingq 5y ago
  There was not-great stuff then too. Wolf Blitzer, for example, seemed to rise quickly and get a lot of air time mostly because he happened to be the one doing the remote reports from Baghdad in Desert Storm.
  - selimthegrim 5y ago
    Wolf Blitzer was the one who observed off the cuff that the Katrina refugees he was seeing were "so poor, and so black"
    - gord288 5y ago
      Awkwardly worded and delivered, but it seems his observation was that Black residents were disproportionately negatively affected by Katrina. A perfectly valid point. I am by no means a defender of Blitzer--his interviews and his framing of issues show him to be a banal thinker--but I feel he received a lot of undeserved criticism for this utterance. Which seemed at the time to mostly come from bad-faith actors like Rush Limbaugh, taking a cheap shot.
      - selimthegrim 5y ago
        The time to say that is not when the camera is panning across an extremely dark-skinned family wading.
- selimthegrim 5y ago
  Larry King went on SNL and did his show as a joke, and one of his mock commentaries to the camera was "Does anyone actually care that Pakistan has the Bomb?"

xkbarkar 5y ago

Anecdotally yeah. Agree. To me cnn is the exact same garbage as fox. Just leftist instead of rightist. I never click on any links to either media. Actually I used to line the guardian but in the past two years the quality of their reporting also just went alarmist and hyperbolic. In some cases blatantly inaccurate. Looking for a good news source currenty that arent afraid of critizicing any political party and their actions.

oldmanhorton 5y ago
I think Shepherd Smith on CNBC is generally pretty good. He definitely does some entertainment and "feel good" stories but for the most part there's less commentary and opinion than most other cable news.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
g42gregory 5y ago
Jonathan Turley, Glenn Greenwald.
- lampshades 5y ago
  > Glenn Greenwald Who is actually on Fox quite a bit these days, funnily enough. 15-25 year old me would have laughed in disbelief, but if I decide to turn on cable news these days, I turn on Fox. Edit: Also, Whitney Webb at Mint Press News is very good, just to throw her in the ring.
  - tootie 5y ago
    Greenwald is going on Tucker Carlson and reciting Kremlin propaganda without any evidence. Russian state media has been gleefully quoting the two of them. https://www.theguardian.com/media/2022/mar/18/ukrainian-bioweapons-labs-qanon-fox-news https://www.theguardian.com/media/2022/mar/18/ukrainian-biow...
- tootie 5y ago
  Greenwald is absolutely off the deep end. Being brave enough to criticize orthodoxy is only laudable if the orthodoxy is actually wrong. Greenwald hasn't backed down from any of his nonsense takes on the Ukraine war no matter how wrong he is.
cableshaft 5y ago
Breaking Points is a good option: https://www.youtube.com/c/breakingpoints https://www.youtube.com/c/breakingpoints They do have their own biases, but the dynamic is more conservative that hates the direction the GOP is going in (Saagar) and liberal progressive who is not a fan of the Democratic establishment (Krystal). As such neither one hesitates to call out what they disagree with for both Republicans and Democrats. They have an optional subscription service that is doing extremely well. CNN should have consulted them for how to set up their premium service, because they have it figured out. Most of their content is free to the public in segments, but you get an unedited full stream unlisted Youtube link if you pay (plus some extra back and forth commentary), as well as bonus segments every week that are unlisted as well. Being independent also makes it so they're not afraid to speak their mind about things either. There's a few things they like to cover repeatedly that I really don't care about personally, and I don't always agree with their views on certain issues, but there's always a few things I like to hear their take on.
- padobson 5y ago
  more conservative that hates the direction the GOP is going I've heard other people say this, but I've never heard Saagar say anything I thought was conservative. He's not paleocon or libertarian because he's comfortable with big domestic government programs. He's not neocon because he spends a lot of time attacking big banks and big tech and he has been very critical of foreign military interventions. I've never heard him take a position on socially conservative issues like abortion or gay marriage. So what am I missing?
  - AdamJacobMuller 5y ago
    > what am I missing? It's very hard to define people who don't fit inside the normal blue-vs-red spectrum. It's really hard to define people who don't fit into an easy quadrant on the political compass test.
TooKool4This 5y ago
An hour of PBS Newshour a day. Very much fact based reporting with maybe a slight left leaning bias. Digest it and move on and live your life. Besides that, I just turn off the news spigot. I'm slowly coming to the realization that watching news was kind of becoming my version of watching reality TV shows. There is of course value in being informed but outside of that, a single person can't meaningfully take action on all the things being reported on. So I see less and less reason to keep up with the news besides just being generally informed. I think a better way to consume news might be to get a few "general" news tidbits through your regular news outlets. And then get more focused news on topics you personally care about and are willing to take action on through non-traditional news outlets.
- lampshades 5y ago
  > with maybe a slight left leaning bias As someone with a conservative leaning bias, I would consider PBS to have a very strong left (whatever that means) leaning bias. I guess it depends on your start point.
  - tootie 5y ago
    It has been said the reality has a liberal bias.
    - jaywalk 5y ago
      ...by people who have a liberal bias.
      - uoaei 5y ago
        That's not really a helpful point. You've introduced a tautology. People who rely on faithful, factual descriptions of reality would be liberals if reality had a liberal bias and they interpreted reality accurately.
        jaywalk 5y ago
gnicholas 5y ago
Reason.com is a libertarian source whose coverage and perspective does not align with the Dem or Repub parties.
- uoaei 5y ago
  "Not-red/not-blue agenda" is different from "no-agenda".
  - gnicholas 5y ago
    Every news source has an agenda. GP was asking for news sources that are not afraid to criticize political parties, and they are not. They even have a range of libertarian views, and they criticize each other/the libertarian party.
    - uoaei 5y ago
      There are plenty others too. Many go further, to criticize corporations and even bare narratives! Below is a small sample, and none are aligned with any party in particular. Center for Public Integrity Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting (FAIR) Novara Media (UK-based) scheerpost.org (Chris Hedges's main outlet) Citations Needed Truthout.org In These Times Evonomics naked capitalism
      - gnicholas 5y ago
        Are any of these not aligned with the far-left? I didn't check them all, but none of them seems to be to the center of the Dems on the issues they cover. Perhaps I didn't dig deep enough? It's possible that the commenter was asking for Dem/Repub-critical sources that are all aligned with one pole, but I interpreted the question as asking for sources whose coverage would not correlate with either party. If you're going to criticize Reason for having an agenda, I would say that critique would apply equally to these sources as well. They seem very agenda driven (which doesn't make them bad)!
        5y ago
rayiner 5y ago
My wife listens to Bloomberg or CNBC. It’s news for rich people who want an accurate analysis of reality because they have money in the market. E.g. I listened to some segments just before the recent Virginia/New Jersey elections and it was just the facts, not teeth gnashing about how the wrong side might win.
room505 5y ago
I like reading The Bulwark, The Dispatch and Lawfare Blog. All seem centrist and have indepth information.

thunderbird120 5y ago

The rise of the internet has not been kind to general purpose journalism. To stay alive news businesses are essentially required to cover specific things in specific ways which maximize capturing people's attention.

mxuribe 5y ago

I haven't watched CNN via TV for years, mostly because i cut the "normal TV" cord years ago. Although back when i did have regular and cable TV, i actually liked it the best as far as Tv News was concerned. For several years now, i have simply subscribed to their daily "5 Things" email newsletter...which aims to give a brief top 5 things one should know. It started out amazing; helping me get the gist for top headliones all while being really short and succinct. Over the years, the amount of content in each daily issue has grown both in content and ads, which i can understand becuase they are still a for-profit business after all...and it is still brief enough for me to skim through every morning. Oh, and its free, so while it does ppiont links to their cnn.com website (which is a different awful beast of advertising hell), i feel that its worth it...and in fact, sort of the kind of reason why i liklely would never subsrcibe to this CNN+ type of subcription.

uoaei 5y ago

The last time I watched CNN it seemed like their writing staff was replaced with unscrupulous psychologists intent on plucking every heart-string they can reach.

silisili 5y ago

Yeah, Fox and CNN - at least their websites, have both become little more than he-said she-said tweet screenshots. I don't use Twitter for a reason, but now I have to see the garbage anyways. At least Fox sometimes has recipes in the comments of Twitter news stories.

rayiner 5y ago

Man you missed CNN in the early 1990s. I used to watch Larry King interviews with my dad. He was so normal and direct and human.

tyingq 5y ago
There was not-great stuff then too. Wolf Blitzer, for example, seemed to rise quickly and get a lot of air time mostly because he happened to be the one doing the remote reports from Baghdad in Desert Storm.
- selimthegrim 5y ago
  Wolf Blitzer was the one who observed off the cuff that the Katrina refugees he was seeing were "so poor, and so black"
  - gord288 5y ago
    Awkwardly worded and delivered, but it seems his observation was that Black residents were disproportionately negatively affected by Katrina. A perfectly valid point. I am by no means a defender of Blitzer--his interviews and his framing of issues show him to be a banal thinker--but I feel he received a lot of undeserved criticism for this utterance. Which seemed at the time to mostly come from bad-faith actors like Rush Limbaugh, taking a cheap shot.
    - selimthegrim 5y ago
      The time to say that is not when the camera is panning across an extremely dark-skinned family wading.
selimthegrim 5y ago
Larry King went on SNL and did his show as a joke, and one of his mock commentaries to the camera was "Does anyone actually care that Pakistan has the Bomb?"