How do you determine a "reputable" news source?

[z31maniac]

This is a personal question from me.

I constantly see both sides saying, "Oh well that's crap, look at the source."

So I'm curious as to how the overly-educated masses here determine what is, or is not, a reputable news source?

"They agree/disagree with my point of view," is not an acceptable answer.

[Kershaw]

"They agree/disagree with my point of view," is not an acceptable answer.

damn you just killed my response.

the bbc. cause they are british and they dont give a fuck.

[george graves]

I get all my news from r3v's P&R forum.

[mrsleeve]

you have to go to both sides and take the commonalities form both versions, and ignore the slant or angle. There you have something close to where the actual truth happens to be.

[Bill 84 318i]

You also have to acknowledge that it's not just ideology that separates them sometimes, but also logic and fact versus fanaticism and creative interpretations of history.

I don't find it easy - one should never be dependent on a single source. It takes a lot of homework and analysis to really make sense of things. I almost never find a single source I'm satisfied with, and rarely feel I've done enough digging on my own.

[Pinepig]

There isn't one.

[e30e]

Google News! It at least provides multiple sources for news.

To me local news has a less political slant than the big cable news.

BBC is a good liberal source because they openly state who they support and when it comes to actual news and not issues they cover the news well.

[nrubenstein]

Google News! It at least provides multiple sources for news.

To me local news has a less political slant than the big cable news.

BBC is a good liberal source because they openly state who they support and when it comes to actual news and not issues they cover the news well.

The answer is that you read a lot of them and become familiar with the biases.

The only one that is really any good at this point is the Economist. No one else is consistently doing any kind of meaningful analysis.

[gwb72tii]

if its fox its ok

[kronus]

fox news bro

[gwb72tii]

yo need to listen to mike savage
naked truth

[LBJefferies]

If a news source makes profit for a person or persons, it is by default a biased source.

[z31maniac]

You guys are all answering how to determine the news, not what is a reputable source.

h0lmes, are you suggesting that the public would be better off with state funded news?

gg/kronus, troll elsewhere.

[LBJefferies]

You guys are all answering how to determine the news, not what is a reputable source.

h0lmes, are you suggesting that the public would be better off with state funded news?

gg/kronus, troll elsewhere.

No, a non-profit would probably be ideal. Although I don't think it's possible to be entirely unbiased.

[z31maniac]

How would you fund a non-profit? I'm not trying to antagonize, but asking honest questions.