Sources

[GutZ]

If you watch, read, listen to news these days within a few mins you can pretty much tell the political affiliation of the source. You could search an issue on the net and you already know which popular sites will pop up.

 

I was wondering if you find this heading in the wrong direction, information is being catorgorized in a way that make that sources inherently bias, especially places like here, you can post a source and I could say "oh fox news..." or "oh CNN...", most of the time it's truth manipulated by opinion. I think people have a legitimate pessimisitic view towards sources.

 

Why isn't there more push for something like science which has a peer-reviewed style.

[jackson33]

CNN, FOX and the others, you will find are packed with attorneys. there are ways to say most anything to show an opinion w/o really giving one. my favorite commentator is Rush Limbaugh, but nearly all his discussion comes from after reading something written by some one else or after a comment made by a caller. the point whatever it is, is from that and then not his...

[Mokele]

They're all corrupt, and all covering up what's really happening. There's only one paper in the world bold enough to expose the truth on the front page:

 

[Pangloss]

There is actually a fairly well-accepted process by which news reporting agencies can seek objective feedback: They can use an ombudsman.

 

Unfortunately in recent years the ombudsman practice has become less acceptable to agencies determined to report a particular perspective. A brief analysis of the history of the New York Times in this area provides all the necessary insight (since every news reporting agency pretty much follows whatever the Great Gray Lady does).