6 ms·

The wall street journal. It leans right but not to fantasy land. I think it's trustworthy since investors need to trust their news sources to make valid investm

The wall street journal. It leans right but not to fantasy land. I think it's trustworthy since investors need to trust their news sources to make valid investments. If they start to get burned by what they read they would abandon it ASAP.

thelastknowngod 4y ago
I read Bloomberg and listen to their podcast as well. I am often in strong disagreement with the writers or guests being interviewed. Al Jazeera's English broadcast is actually quite good for showing an outside, more neutral view of the world (unless the story relates to Qatar) too.
prox 4y ago
Isnt the Economist generally a bit more on the conservative side?
- lanbanger 4y ago
  I've seen the Economist describe itself as "fiscally conservative, socially liberal"
  - WheelsAtLarge 4y ago
    That's how I would describe myself. And I am a fan of the Economist.
threatofrain 4y ago
The WSJ, Economist, or Bloomberg will not help you understand modern American conservatism. That's the conservatism of the early Bush years. You should check out Fox News, OAN, Newsmax and the NY Post (& Sky News for foreign outlet). It doesn't matter if they are accurate — what matters is that they are popular, and thus they represent the heartbeat of modern American conservatism.
- WheelsAtLarge 4y ago
  >You should check out Fox News, OAN, Newsmax and the NY Post (& Sky News for foreign outlet). Good point, at one time I thought that these news sources were the drivers of conservative thinking but what they are are reflectors of what people that consume them want to hear. They spread the word but ultimately they are popular because they know what their audience wants and they are willing to offer it.
- mrweasel 4y ago
  > The WSJ, Economist, or Bloomberg That is because those publications are are economically right-leaning, but not socially (or simply not focused on those aspects). We tend to view right and left as just one thing, but people, publications and political parties can hold for instance left leaning financial opinions, but be right wing in immigration.
- tablespoon 4y ago
  > The WSJ, Economist, or Bloomberg will not help you understand modern American conservatism. That's the conservatism of the early Bush years. They represent the business faction of the coalition, which was dominant (at least until recently), and has the most resources to spend on propaganda. There are other factions (e.g. religious social conservatives). Trump also seemed to kick of a realignment, which scrambles a lot of the old understandings.
TradingPlaces 4y ago
WSJ Opinion is fantasy land. Reporting is top notch.

thelastknowngod 4y ago

I read Bloomberg and listen to their podcast as well. I am often in strong disagreement with the writers or guests being interviewed. Al Jazeera's English broadcast is actually quite good for showing an outside, more neutral view of the world (unless the story relates to Qatar) too.

prox 4y ago

Isnt the Economist generally a bit more on the conservative side?

lanbanger 4y ago
I've seen the Economist describe itself as "fiscally conservative, socially liberal"
- WheelsAtLarge 4y ago
  That's how I would describe myself. And I am a fan of the Economist.

threatofrain 4y ago

The WSJ, Economist, or Bloomberg will not help you understand modern American conservatism. That's the conservatism of the early Bush years. You should check out Fox News, OAN, Newsmax and the NY Post (& Sky News for foreign outlet). It doesn't matter if they are accurate — what matters is that they are popular, and thus they represent the heartbeat of modern American conservatism.

WheelsAtLarge 4y ago
>You should check out Fox News, OAN, Newsmax and the NY Post (& Sky News for foreign outlet). Good point, at one time I thought that these news sources were the drivers of conservative thinking but what they are are reflectors of what people that consume them want to hear. They spread the word but ultimately they are popular because they know what their audience wants and they are willing to offer it.
mrweasel 4y ago
> The WSJ, Economist, or Bloomberg That is because those publications are are economically right-leaning, but not socially (or simply not focused on those aspects). We tend to view right and left as just one thing, but people, publications and political parties can hold for instance left leaning financial opinions, but be right wing in immigration.
tablespoon 4y ago
> The WSJ, Economist, or Bloomberg will not help you understand modern American conservatism. That's the conservatism of the early Bush years. They represent the business faction of the coalition, which was dominant (at least until recently), and has the most resources to spend on propaganda. There are other factions (e.g. religious social conservatives). Trump also seemed to kick of a realignment, which scrambles a lot of the old understandings.

TradingPlaces 4y ago

WSJ Opinion is fantasy land. Reporting is top notch.