Anyone have a reputable non-biased news source where you routinely go to for national / world news? I typically watch Fox News (national and local) but I'm not seeing in-depth coverage like I'd like to see / read about.

For instance, I haven't seen anything on the news in the past week (maybe more) on the wars in Ukraine or Gaza. Seems like once Biden or Trump say something controversial, that's all we see on the national news.

My boss is from Armenia and she told me about the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan and the mass exodus of Armenians from Nagorno-Karabakh...I had no idea that has been going on.

Anyway, looking for some better local and world coverage that our national networks don't spin their political views on...does one exist?

Thanks.

Unbiased news doesn't exist IMO. Your best bet is just finding a bunch of youtubers who do news / commentary IMO.

Pookers said:

---

Unbiased news doesn't exist IMO. Your best bet is just finding a bunch of youtubers who do news / commentary IMO.

---

I think this is exactly right. Find the blogs or newscast on YouTube that you trust. I know he is biased towards the right, but I watch the daily newscast from Bill O'Reilly. If he gets something wrong, he correct it and he doesn't lie that I've seen. You will not get flat out lies from his news.

I start my morning with the 1440 news digest for national and international news and the Dallas Express for state and local. I follow that with Foxnews and Texags and then a Twitter session with followups using Duck Duck Go for details that catch my attention.

The key to Twitter is to ruthlessly curate your follows.

Pookers said:

---

Unbiased news doesn't exist IMO. Your best bet is just finding a bunch of youtubers who do news / commentary IMO.

---

This. A well curated YouTube/Twitter feed is hands down the best option.

It's been mentioned before here...

Ground News gives you a news feed and identifies it's L or R leaning source.

Once you learn that ALL of the news is propaganda, your day will go better.

HTTP://www.allsides.com isn't bad. It's not a true news site but more of an aggregator that details how the issues are presented by the various news orgs


Here's an example

https://www.allsides.com/story/middle-east-undercover-israeli-forces-raid-west-bank-hospital-kill-three-suspected-terrorists

Quote:

---

Undercover Israeli Forces Raid West Bank Hospital, Kill Three Suspected Terrorists

Summary from the AllSides News Team

Israeli commandos, some disguised as medical staff and civilians, infiltrated the West Bank's Ibn Sina Hospital on Tuesday and killed three Palestinians whom Israeli Defense Forces suspected were planning a terror attack.

The Details: The three targets reportedly included siblings Mohammad and Basil Ayman al Ghazawi, members of Islamic Jihad, as well as Mohammad Walid Jalamna, a Hamas member allegedly planning an attack.

For Context: The incident underscored the role of hospitals in the Israel-Hamas war, with Israeli forces pursuing Hamas fighters they say are hiding in medical facilities, even as Gaza's public health system struggles to support hundreds of thousands of displaced people. Unlike Gaza, the West Bank is under the control of the Palestinian Authority, not Hamas.

Related: The IDF denied that its troops had stormed a separate hospital in the city of Khan Younis in the Gaza Strip on Tuesday, after Reuters (Center bias) reported they had.

How the Media Covered It: Coverage was widespread across the spectrum, often displaying sensationalism. Headlines often differed on what to call the Israeli commandos' targets, echoing previous divides on whether to call Hamas fighters "terrorists." The New York Post (Lean Right bias) called them "terrorists," Reuters called them "Palestinian militants," NPR (Lean Left bias) called them "Palestinians," Time Magazine (Lean Left bias) called them "militants," and CBS News (Lean Left bias) called them "terror suspects."

---

I would strongly encourage both left and right leaning folks to follow Dave Smith.

He is very well researched and checks both the left and right. It's a great way to stay balanced and avoid gaslighting on either side. The DNC and RNC have done a superb job on convincing their sheeple that Libertarians are comicon freaks to be marginalized at every opportunity, so doubt he ever blows up big.

https://youtube.com/@PartOfTheProblem

I've absorbed enough news over the decades from different sources that I can get news from NPR, CNN, NBC or Fox and with 95% certainty know what they're leaving out of the story that doesn't push the narrative they think their viewers want.

Your best bet is sifting through Twitter. You'll get both sides and then be able to determine where the true story is about half way between

It's what I do.

But you still have to be sure to filter out the leftist bias your algorithm still allows to infiltrate the feed.

I watch Zeihan on GeoPolitics, Joe Blogs and Locked on Aggies first thing daily. Then I'll go to the Forbe's Breaking News channel.

Use to watch Rising from the The Hill a bit but got the sense they were being less than transparent regarding their leanings.

Because I'm invested in TSLA, I watch SolvingTheMoney Problem, that guy, Steven Mark Ryan, is a ballbuster to left for an Ausie. But he's like me, convinced the future is electric. Loomis from Electrified is another good listen, if he tends to be left of center...I think.

On things about China I watch a South African ExPat that use to live and is married to a Chinese woman, Zerpentza...good insight.

Combat Veteran Reacts is a good one on Ukraine and war, Denys Davidov is surely a Ukranian Propagandist, but I watch him.

I like METATRON for stuff on History and late archeology.

YouTube is a freaking flame for a moth, so you have to be careful with it.

It's doesn't exist and isn't possible because something biased, whether human or AI, wrote it.

Best you can do is read articles from every angle. I use the real clear aggregator and it usually provides articles from every angle.

https://www.improvethenews.org/

Vivek Ramaswamy spoke about what's going on in Azerbaijan many times when he was running, especially when he did long form podcast interviews. But yes, it's been pretty much absent in the news in the US. Doesn't fit anyone's narratives and isn't being policed or funded by the US.

we need more shows like Hannity & Combs from back in the day, where you get both the conservative and the socialist view on every news bite.

For TV mostly go News Nation

Smirconish and Dan Abrams have pretty good radio shows if you are looking for commentary. Occasionally the Republican will come out in Smirconish and the Democrat in Abrams but they are both pretty fair. I find myself agreeing with their opinions far more often than not. They are on POTUS.

Matt Taibbi is really good. I probably read 6-8 articles a day on the various Real Clear pages.


Actual news? As in factual news? I really do not think that exists anymore. You have to listen to and read the commentary and figure it out.

I've been trying to gain some perspective, searching lefty X accounts and pravda rag sites to understand why an open border is such a wonderful thing, why they wanted it/voted for it, how it's going to help the citizens that are already here, etc. I just can't find anything.

Clavell said:

---

For TV mostly go News Nation

---

I suppose TexAgs is a hard R?

Struggle and Strifer said:

---

Once you learn that ALL of the news is propaganda, your day will go better.

---

Ole here...there was a time, the above wasn't true.

I get most of my news from texags. It is always posted here before it hits mainstream.

AGinHI said:

---

Clavell said:

---

For TV mostly go News Nation

---

I suppose TexAgs is a hard R?

---

That's a great chart. My main source of news is center right The Dispatch. Their daily newsletter takes five minutes to read, doesn't have any emotional commentary, and does a great job of keeping me informed of the news of the day.

Pookers said:

---

Unbiased news doesn't exist IMO. Your best bet is just finding a bunch of youtubers who do news / commentary IMO.

---

Agree with this. The average American, if they really want to glean an unbiased view, will have to look at a number of sources and know how much credence to give to any of them. Many people don't take the time and yet espouse what they heard as truth.

As with MSM, even social media influencers, hosts likely have an agenda to increase views/monetize.