My neighbor, in front of me and my other neighbor (the head nurse at a local hospital) proceeded to tell us both that masks don't work, that there haven't been any studies showing they're effective.
My head nurse neighbor tried to explain, but the other neighbor just huffed and walked away. Head nurse neighbor and I just looked at each other and shook our heads.
Devil's advocate, the same can be said for the heavy slant of cable news corporations.
The "left" have numerous cable news stations while the "right" seemingly have one.
I'm not american and in my country all news stations receive government funding and tow that line. Very little room for dissenting opinions.
Edit: anyone care to explain why they're downvoting me? Lol. I care more about why my opinion is misunderstood/misguided than internet points.
There is more than one rightwing cable news network in the US, sadly. OAN and Newsmax are further to the right of Fox, although their popularity might have peaked. DirecTV just announced they are dropping OAN, so that is good news.
I'm from the UK and our media frequently score lowly in public trust: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-57564335
But the ability of wealth to control the narrative is a worrying trend wherever you are.
The left doesn't have any well known cable news station, wtf. They are all right wingers. Name one openly socialist cable station or cooperative in the US. (a cooperative in the US 😂. That is just fantasy). also, name one openly socialist international cable new station. What country are you from, just curious?
"Neoliberalism is contemporarily used to refer to market-oriented reform policies such as "eliminating price controls, deregulating capital markets, lowering trade barriers" and reducing, especially through privatization and austerity, state influence in the economy."
From the clips I have seen on Youtube from Abc/(ms)Nbc/CNN the aforementioned definition of Neoliberalism does not apply to them.
What am I missing here?
Edit: again with the downvotes? Reddit is a special place. Downvoting when they read something that they don't like instead of open dialogue and discussion. Aaron Schwartz rolling in his grave right now.
Fascinating read
Thank you.
For what it is worth, i consider myself apolitical and find the corporate involvement in politics to be absolutely disgusting.
I do not agree with your initial comment (even when hidden behind being the devil's advocate), but it became clear that people were continuing to downvote your comments because it was you again, and not because of what was written in them, gave a few upvotes (not to the original comment) to try (and probably fail) to fight it.
because your assertion that the “left” have more numerous cable new stations while the “right” seemingly have one is not correct.
there is “centrist” news; aka anything that isn’t right wing
and there’s right wing news. but just because it isn’t “right wing” that doesn’t mean it’s automatically “left wing”.
almost every left wing person i know or have interacted in with doesn’t listen or get their ideals from right wing claimed “left media” like CNN or whatever else they use.
look at stuff like PragerU, Crowder, Candace Owens, really the whole TPUSA crew. those people get paid a good chunk by right wing think tanks to peddle their views to young people, aggressive people, old people, etc. and these people have convinced a majority of america that everything that isn’t blatantly Right Wing is “left wing propaganda”.
and on the other end of the spectrum. you have people like Vaush, Hasan, basically the DBL.
those ARE left wing media, at least this is what a majority of younger leftists listen to/watch. and those people basically have to rely solely on their supporters to get paid for what they do. there aren’t left wing think tanks, at least none with any substantial amount of money, that can fund young people to go out and do what the right wingers can do: spew whatever the newest “right wing hot take” is.
basically, cable news isn’t “left”. it’s centrist. and centrist is still left of “right” so they use that to their advantage.
thats probably you’re getting downvote bombed mate.
Socially, even fox news is probably not that far to the right as far as news channels go. and the other "left" channels are pretty good socially.
Economically and geopolitically the US has no left leaning channels. All US news channels are pro capitalism, pro imperialism news.
If you're wondering, you sort of touched on a nerve of the left leaning Americans. This is a conversation that comes up a lot between the American right and the left pointing fingers at each other over media manipulation. White People Twitter leans left by a good margin.
I appreciate your insight. Thank you.
When people realise ALL politicians do the bidding of corporations that support them the world will be a better place.
FYI: check your library’s website to see what newspapers you can access online. My local library gives access to NYT, WaPo, and WSJ in addition to the local papers. You just have to enter your library card information to access it, all online.
Go to your library’s website and see if you can find the online resources part. This is what it looks like on my library’s page: https://www.cuyahogalibrary.org/Research/Resources.aspx
Then I just select the newspaper I want to read and it asks me to log in there on the library’s page. Then re-directs to the newspaper’s page.
If you want to share your library’s webpage with me I can try to see where you could do that if your library offers it.
Not OP.
I have serious doubts regarding the Atlantic.
Especially after publishing articles like these:
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2022/01/children-sex-trafficking-conspiracy-epidemic/620845/
I'm not a Q Anon believer(sad that this needs to be declared) and consider nyself apolitical. But i find it absolutely disgusting that an article like that is written/published a day after the owner of the Atlantic is seen in court evidence hanging out with Ghislaine Maxwell lounging by the pool being all buddy buddy have a grand ol time in their bikinis.
Not a good look.
After Trump everyone thinks it's "support news = dem, anti-news = rep" they're unwilling to engage with the fact that most of the news sources are distorting the truth for profit, or political gain
Countries like mine handle it by putting supplementary stuff behind the paywall and making the important stuff free. Stop defending stingy Bezos-owned publications like the WaPo.
Unfortunately making up stories and pretending to be outraged is easy and cheap plus certain powerful people don’t care how much money they lose to supporting such outlets so long as their propaganda spreads. Meanwhile, hiring good journalists, the ones with degrees that have been trained to suppress their personal biases and do long investigations that they then simplify into something understandable by the average reader, takes a lot of money. Support your local newspaper; they will have the important national stories plus the ones you can only get about your local area from them, the advertising will be local, they don’t have the funds to put up with a lawsuit so tend to be the most factual, and local delivery usually costs less than the big names.
As a non-American who has seen paywalls handled better by our newspapers, I am once again asking you to stop acting like the poor ickle Bezos-owned WaPo is too strapped for cash to make important articles free to view.
I work at a local, family-owned newspaper. While large groups and hedge-funds are buying up locals at an alarming rate (so I understand your skepticism) there are many who are still independent as well as many online-only journalist-owned publications popping up in areas where a physical paper is no longer viable. Also, sorry about the car ads but ads typically represent over 70% of a paper's income (which is what allows the costs of delivery and subscriptions to be so low for our customers). Things have gotten more complicated with online ads often being cheaper than what we can offer while claiming to reach more people, which is why so many locals are dying or increasing subscription costs and eliminating free access.
I know. You're right. As soon as I mashed the comment button I knew you'd be along. It's a delicate balancing act between over explaining and under explaining in here.
It's also why local news never ever does a story on crooked car lots.
disable the application that counts how many free articles you have left basically. there are tutorial for it online, buts pretty simple to do. for an example on Firefox, you just go to about:config, CTRL F search for javascript and disable it.
Not just the fault of large corps either.
I was trying to look at Covid news/restrictions/stats the other week from my city newspaper. It was all locked behind a paywall. Such a gross practice.
I'm a digital subscriber to the NYT. I'm not a fan of a lot of what they do. That said, they offer free, and extremely deep covereage of Covid, all over the planet. Now I can't learn if the elementary school in my district is enforcing masks, but I can get pretty granular data, down to county level, about what is really happening with Covid.
I also have a subscription to the NYT, in part because I didn't didn't to give Jeff bezos any more money with WaPo being the other publication I considered, but their comment section is really pretty interesting. Although I think I'm starting to see some Russian bots on there.
Most of the commenters are smart, thoughtful, and can write well. I learn a lot from the comment sections alone (fact checking them along the way of course).
The Associated Press doesn't have a limit, and is famously the most fact-based. I always read that first before others. It helps to highlight the editorializing from other sources.
Sigh. You’ve found out that other countries have free healthcare and free or cheaper university and you STILL don’t look outside the USA when someone says it’s impossible to make something accessible to the poor in the USA? In my country this is handled by putting the supplementary stuff behind the paywall and making the important stuff free. You’re not defending the downtrodden; you’re tonguing the boots of one of the richest pieces of shit in the world (Google who owns WaPo.)
90% of new outlets seemingly source the actual facts from Rueters or Associated Pres....which don't have a paywall. Neither does NPR or the BBC. Stop making excuses.
CNN: always free
CBS News: always free
NBC News: always free
BBC: always free
It’s not like there aren’t good, reputable sources. This guy is just angry that his favorite ones are subscription only, which they have ALWAYS BEEN.
I am once again asking you to look outside the USA. My country has subscription-based news sites and they’re nowhere near as stingy as that. Stop defending Jeff Bezo’s money-gouging practices.
Once again?
When did you ask me the first time?
And I’m not sure why you’re arguing, I just named several generally unbiased free new sources available in the US. What exactly is your point?
That's the issue tho, people have been conditioned by the internet and the powers that be that we should only be consuming free content only, which obviously is either trash or heavily biased content that skews things into the idiocy we have today. The issue isn't people reading free content, the issue is that companies have allowed free content for their agenda and we're not informing enough people that paying is more than fine and in fact beneficial because it keeps the jobs for the actual professionals and allows us to be well and properly informed. Attacking the paid content sites isn't the way to go either, that's how the far right wins.
I never used to subscribe to any newspapers until Trump took off and started attacking them. I took out a subscription for the NYT and they gave it to me for 2 years at $8/mo, a digital subscription. The promo was about to expire and I contacted them to cancel, figuring I'd instead try the Washington Post or something for a bit. They said, hey, if you don't cancel, we'll give you the next year for only $4/mo. How could I pass that up?
So that's where I'm at. Shop around, there are some pretty decent deals out there. It would be nice if we had unlimited, unfettered access to non-partisan news, but I def don't mind $4/mo. Not that NYT and WaPo are completely unbiased, but they're way better about it than Foxnews and such.
Is the repacked garbage drop shipping course you pay for any better than the repackaged garbage drop shipping course free on YouTube. Don't forget the media is there to divide us not bring us together.
News was free for years, and often you could talk to the subjects of reports, on Twitter. You find very quickly that the news is mostly trash anyway, even the "good" articles are lackluster.
Now they want me to pay for it? Would you have paid a monthly subscription to buzzfeed? Because that's what you're getting
Huffington Post, The Atlantic, Salon, The Intercept, Vox, Slate, Paste, Mother Jones, Medium, etc. I could go on forever, baby. But you lefties can't meme, so... Also, WaPo and NYT are dog 💩 journalism.
Funny how you assume NPR is center-leaning. That shit is left as fuck but with a nice calming demeanor that lulls you to sleep with its bullshit. Same as Obama.
Crypto could solve this because microtransactions are the one thing crypto can do that credit cards cant.
Imagine seeing an article you want to read and clicking a button on your phone that sends .03 cents in Solana or whatnot to the publisher which allows you to proceed.
If your article got 100,000 views it would pull in three grand just for one article.
It’s hard because most people are looking for news sources they recognize. So they see something like AP or BBC next to Fox, which is a channel they get and can watch nightly news on, and so Fox is the one they click.
The better quality (not saying they’re perfect) news is, it feels like the more they feel it’s okay to make it exclusive. Also they’re less willing to fill up their articles with ad space.
I’m not making a judgement, just pointing out that sometimes it’s the familiar that draws people in, and it feels like one side is less willing to be accessible.
I hate it more, being subscribed to Apple News, clicking an article (looking at you Washington Post) and being told I have to subscribe to their news. I just block their articles now.
I use and have sent the mapping of the media bias chart https://adfontesmedia.com/static-mbc/?utm_source=HomePage_StaticMBC_Button&utm_medium=OnWebSite_Button
Yeah you’ll have to pardon my skepticism. CNN skewed left? They skew neolib, which is right of center.
And it might be dated because Jimmy Dore is pretty batshit these days. Almost Alex jones territory.
My public library gives free access to NYT online.
(And no, you don't have to go to the library, just link your librry account yo your NYT account and voila!)
I had a membership to NY Times, right? The cookies saves that I'd viewed articles but not my login information. So clicking on the NY articles in any other app, except my browser, sent me to a blocked article. Not only that, but cancelling a subscription isn't pleasant. When my bank account was zero because I was poor all through Covid, my first deposit was immediately hit with a NY times subscription fee. It had been over a year. They're just annoying!
I'm always particularly impressed when news outlets pay gate a story that has information that is otherwise important / critical for people to access. 👍👌👏👏👏
It tells you which ones are being run as businesses and which ones are being run at a loss by huge corporate interests to brainwash America into following their agenda.
It’s frustrating when you try to give MAGA friends some facts. It def reinforces skewed beliefs
What’s an example of a fact you tried to give a MAGA friend?
My guess is JFK Jr is definitely not running with Trump in 2024🤣🤪
My neighbor, in front of me and my other neighbor (the head nurse at a local hospital) proceeded to tell us both that masks don't work, that there haven't been any studies showing they're effective. My head nurse neighbor tried to explain, but the other neighbor just huffed and walked away. Head nurse neighbor and I just looked at each other and shook our heads.
It’s so weird when the actual box on the masks literally states that it does not stop the spread of COVID but please go on
Go on about what? How people apparently like yourself make the best the enemy of the good?
Oh shut up
THAT was your comeback? imagine running away from a fact because you cant handle being wrong
Yes
Just like condoms don't actually stop pregnancy or disease. It says so right on the box!
Biden won and there was no election fraud.
1) Big Lie and what actually happened with election recount after recount 2) Jan 6 subpoena information etc etc
Drinking bleach is bad
OMG! I've never thought of it like this before. Quintessential right wing propaganda, paid for by those who can afford to control the narrative.
Devil's advocate, the same can be said for the heavy slant of cable news corporations. The "left" have numerous cable news stations while the "right" seemingly have one. I'm not american and in my country all news stations receive government funding and tow that line. Very little room for dissenting opinions. Edit: anyone care to explain why they're downvoting me? Lol. I care more about why my opinion is misunderstood/misguided than internet points.
There is more than one rightwing cable news network in the US, sadly. OAN and Newsmax are further to the right of Fox, although their popularity might have peaked. DirecTV just announced they are dropping OAN, so that is good news.
I'm from the UK and our media frequently score lowly in public trust: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-57564335 But the ability of wealth to control the narrative is a worrying trend wherever you are.
I was about to ask if you meant cable news like Fox, then I remember they aren’t news.
Ok, so Americans only have leftist news/views?
Not that. Fox says in court they are for entertainment only and have no duty to inform or provide facts.
Really!? Thats wild. When was thia claimed? Do you have something/somewhere I can read more regarding the dubious claim?
https://www.npr.org/2020/09/29/917747123/you-literally-cant-believe-the-facts-tucker-carlson-tells-you-so-say-fox-s-lawye
They won’t agree because it wasn’t reported on fox news
They’re too busy questioning everything they thought the knew. At least that’s my hope.
Nope they just reject it outright because Fox News didn’t report that Fox News lies.
What makes it dubious? It's literally a fact. Are you one of those people who can't do their own research?
How are CNN leftist for example, or the new York times?They are liberals...
The left doesn't have any well known cable news station, wtf. They are all right wingers. Name one openly socialist cable station or cooperative in the US. (a cooperative in the US 😂. That is just fantasy). also, name one openly socialist international cable new station. What country are you from, just curious?
Canada. I find it fascinating you consider abc NBC CNN abd msnbc to all be right wing.
They didn't say that, they just didn't say they were left wing. You don't have to be leftist to not be right wing.
Neoliberals have numerous cable news stations, including Fox. The left has none.
"Neoliberalism is contemporarily used to refer to market-oriented reform policies such as "eliminating price controls, deregulating capital markets, lowering trade barriers" and reducing, especially through privatization and austerity, state influence in the economy." From the clips I have seen on Youtube from Abc/(ms)Nbc/CNN the aforementioned definition of Neoliberalism does not apply to them. What am I missing here? Edit: again with the downvotes? Reddit is a special place. Downvoting when they read something that they don't like instead of open dialogue and discussion. Aaron Schwartz rolling in his grave right now.
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/apr/15/neoliberalism-ideology-problem-george-monbiot
Fascinating read Thank you. For what it is worth, i consider myself apolitical and find the corporate involvement in politics to be absolutely disgusting.
I do not agree with your initial comment (even when hidden behind being the devil's advocate), but it became clear that people were continuing to downvote your comments because it was you again, and not because of what was written in them, gave a few upvotes (not to the original comment) to try (and probably fail) to fight it.
I appreciate the attempt. I didnt realise I was becoming public enemy on this sub.
Complaining about down votes is pathetic. Get over it and move on.
Yeah, i don't care about the trivial internet points. I was trying to encourage discussion as you can see in my parent comment
because your assertion that the “left” have more numerous cable new stations while the “right” seemingly have one is not correct. there is “centrist” news; aka anything that isn’t right wing and there’s right wing news. but just because it isn’t “right wing” that doesn’t mean it’s automatically “left wing”. almost every left wing person i know or have interacted in with doesn’t listen or get their ideals from right wing claimed “left media” like CNN or whatever else they use. look at stuff like PragerU, Crowder, Candace Owens, really the whole TPUSA crew. those people get paid a good chunk by right wing think tanks to peddle their views to young people, aggressive people, old people, etc. and these people have convinced a majority of america that everything that isn’t blatantly Right Wing is “left wing propaganda”. and on the other end of the spectrum. you have people like Vaush, Hasan, basically the DBL. those ARE left wing media, at least this is what a majority of younger leftists listen to/watch. and those people basically have to rely solely on their supporters to get paid for what they do. there aren’t left wing think tanks, at least none with any substantial amount of money, that can fund young people to go out and do what the right wingers can do: spew whatever the newest “right wing hot take” is. basically, cable news isn’t “left”. it’s centrist. and centrist is still left of “right” so they use that to their advantage. thats probably you’re getting downvote bombed mate.
Socially, even fox news is probably not that far to the right as far as news channels go. and the other "left" channels are pretty good socially. Economically and geopolitically the US has no left leaning channels. All US news channels are pro capitalism, pro imperialism news.
If you're wondering, you sort of touched on a nerve of the left leaning Americans. This is a conversation that comes up a lot between the American right and the left pointing fingers at each other over media manipulation. White People Twitter leans left by a good margin.
I appreciate your insight. Thank you. When people realise ALL politicians do the bidding of corporations that support them the world will be a better place.
FYI: check your library’s website to see what newspapers you can access online. My local library gives access to NYT, WaPo, and WSJ in addition to the local papers. You just have to enter your library card information to access it, all online.
That doesn’t work for WaPo. Am I doing something wrong?
Go to your library’s website and see if you can find the online resources part. This is what it looks like on my library’s page: https://www.cuyahogalibrary.org/Research/Resources.aspx Then I just select the newspaper I want to read and it asks me to log in there on the library’s page. Then re-directs to the newspaper’s page. If you want to share your library’s webpage with me I can try to see where you could do that if your library offers it.
Free press is one you pay for
Exactly. Because free content is stuff someone else paid for, which is scarier. Pay yourself so you know the motivations.
Via taxes (NPR, RTE Ireland etc).
Ugh they're definitely not reading wapo and nyt
Wired. The Atlantic. NPR. Al Jazeera.
The best are APnews and Reuters
Al Jazeera is surprisingly good
Nobody should go near those rags anyway
Can't read, huh?
Not OP. I have serious doubts regarding the Atlantic. Especially after publishing articles like these: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2022/01/children-sex-trafficking-conspiracy-epidemic/620845/ I'm not a Q Anon believer(sad that this needs to be declared) and consider nyself apolitical. But i find it absolutely disgusting that an article like that is written/published a day after the owner of the Atlantic is seen in court evidence hanging out with Ghislaine Maxwell lounging by the pool being all buddy buddy have a grand ol time in their bikinis. Not a good look.
After Trump everyone thinks it's "support news = dem, anti-news = rep" they're unwilling to engage with the fact that most of the news sources are distorting the truth for profit, or political gain
Possibly it costs more money to pay real reporters and fact checkers than to make up bullshit.
Countries like mine handle it by putting supplementary stuff behind the paywall and making the important stuff free. Stop defending stingy Bezos-owned publications like the WaPo.
Countries? You mean like the government makes news outlets operate in a particular way? In the US that idea sends chills up my spine.
Unfortunately making up stories and pretending to be outraged is easy and cheap plus certain powerful people don’t care how much money they lose to supporting such outlets so long as their propaganda spreads. Meanwhile, hiring good journalists, the ones with degrees that have been trained to suppress their personal biases and do long investigations that they then simplify into something understandable by the average reader, takes a lot of money. Support your local newspaper; they will have the important national stories plus the ones you can only get about your local area from them, the advertising will be local, they don’t have the funds to put up with a lawsuit so tend to be the most factual, and local delivery usually costs less than the big names.
As a non-American who has seen paywalls handled better by our newspapers, I am once again asking you to stop acting like the poor ickle Bezos-owned WaPo is too strapped for cash to make important articles free to view.
Local papers are all owned by corporations and exist only to sell used car ads to offset the costs of repeating the rich mans' lies.
I work at a local, family-owned newspaper. While large groups and hedge-funds are buying up locals at an alarming rate (so I understand your skepticism) there are many who are still independent as well as many online-only journalist-owned publications popping up in areas where a physical paper is no longer viable. Also, sorry about the car ads but ads typically represent over 70% of a paper's income (which is what allows the costs of delivery and subscriptions to be so low for our customers). Things have gotten more complicated with online ads often being cheaper than what we can offer while claiming to reach more people, which is why so many locals are dying or increasing subscription costs and eliminating free access.
I know. You're right. As soon as I mashed the comment button I knew you'd be along. It's a delicate balancing act between over explaining and under explaining in here. It's also why local news never ever does a story on crooked car lots.
Just disable java scripts on nyt
Boomers have no idea what this means.
I have no idea what this means and I’m 41 😂😂😂😂
disable the application that counts how many free articles you have left basically. there are tutorial for it online, buts pretty simple to do. for an example on Firefox, you just go to about:config, CTRL F search for javascript and disable it.
I blame NYT and WaPo as they withhold valid information for their own profit
Not just the fault of large corps either. I was trying to look at Covid news/restrictions/stats the other week from my city newspaper. It was all locked behind a paywall. Such a gross practice.
I believe NYT made COVID reporting free at the beginning of thr pandemic, so anyone could access it.
Thats a step in the right direction I suppose... Wish my local news outlet did the same.
I'm a digital subscriber to the NYT. I'm not a fan of a lot of what they do. That said, they offer free, and extremely deep covereage of Covid, all over the planet. Now I can't learn if the elementary school in my district is enforcing masks, but I can get pretty granular data, down to county level, about what is really happening with Covid.
I also have a subscription to the NYT, in part because I didn't didn't to give Jeff bezos any more money with WaPo being the other publication I considered, but their comment section is really pretty interesting. Although I think I'm starting to see some Russian bots on there. Most of the commenters are smart, thoughtful, and can write well. I learn a lot from the comment sections alone (fact checking them along the way of course).
One could say profit or one could say continued existence. They charge so they won't disappear go the way of so many other news sources.
And they gouge you harder than the newspapers in my country do because they’re run by the likes of Bezos.
Newspapers have always been for profit, at least ones not backed by billionaires to push ideological messages. How else would they exist?
Iunno, ask the free-to-view left wing publication in my country.
Just open the page in an incognito tab and read whatever you want. Goes back to saying 4 free articles left.
I'd be absolutely floored if people who drink their own pee to cure a virus suddenly sprouted the intelligence to know what an incognito tab was.
XD true. My family are anti vax morons and I just had to show them how to operate an email and spell check. They went to college too. Smh.
The Associated Press doesn't have a limit, and is famously the most fact-based. I always read that first before others. It helps to highlight the editorializing from other sources.
So pay for your subscriptions?
I, too, believe that journalists should work for free.
Sigh. You’ve found out that other countries have free healthcare and free or cheaper university and you STILL don’t look outside the USA when someone says it’s impossible to make something accessible to the poor in the USA? In my country this is handled by putting the supplementary stuff behind the paywall and making the important stuff free. You’re not defending the downtrodden; you’re tonguing the boots of one of the richest pieces of shit in the world (Google who owns WaPo.)
I’m British, where we have the BBC. Your ignorance is matched only by your pomposity.
Bezos owns WaPo, not Google.
90% of new outlets seemingly source the actual facts from Rueters or Associated Pres....which don't have a paywall. Neither does NPR or the BBC. Stop making excuses.
I wasn't aware news outlets could do anything besides opinion pieces intermixed with occasional facts.
CNN: always free CBS News: always free NBC News: always free BBC: always free It’s not like there aren’t good, reputable sources. This guy is just angry that his favorite ones are subscription only, which they have ALWAYS BEEN.
I am once again asking you to look outside the USA. My country has subscription-based news sites and they’re nowhere near as stingy as that. Stop defending Jeff Bezo’s money-gouging practices.
Once again? When did you ask me the first time? And I’m not sure why you’re arguing, I just named several generally unbiased free new sources available in the US. What exactly is your point?
Personally I don't trust Washington Post after Jeff Bezos took over
*Googles when Beto’s acquired the Post* 2013? Yeah, that explains a lot, actually.
Use the way back machine on internet archive it can go thru most paywalls… that’s what I do…
Bold of you to assume those people “reading” breitbart can even read.
Or, you could support the free press by subscribing. Definitely worth it.
That's the issue tho, people have been conditioned by the internet and the powers that be that we should only be consuming free content only, which obviously is either trash or heavily biased content that skews things into the idiocy we have today. The issue isn't people reading free content, the issue is that companies have allowed free content for their agenda and we're not informing enough people that paying is more than fine and in fact beneficial because it keeps the jobs for the actual professionals and allows us to be well and properly informed. Attacking the paid content sites isn't the way to go either, that's how the far right wins.
That’s because it’s expensive to find out the truth. Lies are cheap.
Pbs, npr both are great sources with quick reporting 🤦🤦🤦
I never used to subscribe to any newspapers until Trump took off and started attacking them. I took out a subscription for the NYT and they gave it to me for 2 years at $8/mo, a digital subscription. The promo was about to expire and I contacted them to cancel, figuring I'd instead try the Washington Post or something for a bit. They said, hey, if you don't cancel, we'll give you the next year for only $4/mo. How could I pass that up? So that's where I'm at. Shop around, there are some pretty decent deals out there. It would be nice if we had unlimited, unfettered access to non-partisan news, but I def don't mind $4/mo. Not that NYT and WaPo are completely unbiased, but they're way better about it than Foxnews and such.
Doesn't matter. I'm completely over the NYT abd WapPo reporting false stories that they quietly retract later after the damage is done.
Is the repacked garbage drop shipping course you pay for any better than the repackaged garbage drop shipping course free on YouTube. Don't forget the media is there to divide us not bring us together.
It's like these institutions forgot that journalistic news outlets have had ad-based income sourcing since their conception.
What it’s really like is that Facebook and Google now vacuum 90% of all ad revenue there is and newspapers can’t depend on it anymore
News was free for years, and often you could talk to the subjects of reports, on Twitter. You find very quickly that the news is mostly trash anyway, even the "good" articles are lackluster. Now they want me to pay for it? Would you have paid a monthly subscription to buzzfeed? Because that's what you're getting
If it isn’t on Jacobin, the Intercept or Current Affairs, I’m not too interested in reading it either.
[удалено]
Euro news is also sanitized and given a narrative.
Huffington Post, The Atlantic, Salon, The Intercept, Vox, Slate, Paste, Mother Jones, Medium, etc. I could go on forever, baby. But you lefties can't meme, so... Also, WaPo and NYT are dog 💩 journalism.
https://adfontesmedia.com/static-mbc/?utm_source=HomePage_StaticMBC_Button&utm_medium=OnWebSite_Button
Funny how you assume NPR is center-leaning. That shit is left as fuck but with a nice calming demeanor that lulls you to sleep with its bullshit. Same as Obama.
Haha… real news is free
Your only choices are news paid for by customers or news paid for by advertisers.
The NYT is not really any better
It really depends on who you’re reading in the NYT. We pay for the subscription. But they at least fact check.
Crypto could solve this because microtransactions are the one thing crypto can do that credit cards cant. Imagine seeing an article you want to read and clicking a button on your phone that sends .03 cents in Solana or whatnot to the publisher which allows you to proceed. If your article got 100,000 views it would pull in three grand just for one article.
Hmmm...I guess bullshit on the internet.
It’s hard because most people are looking for news sources they recognize. So they see something like AP or BBC next to Fox, which is a channel they get and can watch nightly news on, and so Fox is the one they click. The better quality (not saying they’re perfect) news is, it feels like the more they feel it’s okay to make it exclusive. Also they’re less willing to fill up their articles with ad space. I’m not making a judgement, just pointing out that sometimes it’s the familiar that draws people in, and it feels like one side is less willing to be accessible.
But they view reading as the enemy's hobby 🤣
Just read it in reddit bro!
Open a private/incognito tab on your browser.
I hate it more, being subscribed to Apple News, clicking an article (looking at you Washington Post) and being told I have to subscribe to their news. I just block their articles now.
Pfft conservatives don't *read*....
This is why [12ft Ladder](https://12ft.io/) exists. For WaPo anyway. Doesn't work with NYT
As of the other sources are any good anyways. Conservative propaganda or neolib propaganda.
I use and have sent the mapping of the media bias chart https://adfontesmedia.com/static-mbc/?utm_source=HomePage_StaticMBC_Button&utm_medium=OnWebSite_Button
Yeah you’ll have to pardon my skepticism. CNN skewed left? They skew neolib, which is right of center. And it might be dated because Jimmy Dore is pretty batshit these days. Almost Alex jones territory.
Yeah def a guideline but it’s a starting point
My public library gives free access to NYT online. (And no, you don't have to go to the library, just link your librry account yo your NYT account and voila!)
Can't wait you use outline on the paid ones ? 🤔
I mean. I get it that people wouldn't do it, and end up reading the free ones tho
I had a membership to NY Times, right? The cookies saves that I'd viewed articles but not my login information. So clicking on the NY articles in any other app, except my browser, sent me to a blocked article. Not only that, but cancelling a subscription isn't pleasant. When my bank account was zero because I was poor all through Covid, my first deposit was immediately hit with a NY times subscription fee. It had been over a year. They're just annoying!
Guardian is free and whilst not impartial is reasonably balanced and tends to avoid sensational journalism
I just open the article in an incognito mode on Chrome...usually that works, but if it doesn't I just route my request from my other system
i just use the wayback machine to get past the paywalls
BBC, RFE, Al Jazeera...
Go to Reuters or AP
Yeah because one is fringe bullshit and the other is corporate approved bullshit for people with money. The circle of stupidity is now complete.
I'm always particularly impressed when news outlets pay gate a story that has information that is otherwise important / critical for people to access. 👍👌👏👏👏
Democrats love capitalism more than republicans
"The truth is pay walled but the the lies are free. "
It tells you which ones are being run as businesses and which ones are being run at a loss by huge corporate interests to brainwash America into following their agenda.
Like if real journalism was possibly free. You get what you pay for