What is your primary news source?

[Outer Sparta]

Mainstream media is largely corporatist, which influences how they report on things.

Oh for sure. You gotta understand everything you see on the media is heavily biased in favor of big business and the government

The BBC is especially guilty of being pro-establishment. They would rather report on Boris Johnson putting jam on his scones than any of the issues plaguing the working class.

[Umpus]

Newsy, and the interwebses.
But can anyone show me actual bias from CNN instead of just talking about it? No opinion pieces, please.

Remember when the K files hunted a man down for making a meme about them? Or when they played the edited tape of George Zimmerman saying "he looks suspicious, I think he's black" (they cut out the part where the 911 operator asked him what race the suspect was).

Can you please provide a link to this?

[Rojava Free State]

CNN seem too biased in their hate against Donald Trump. I don't agree with his policies, but the bias from CNN against Donald Trump is crazy lol...my dad and I were just watching in almost utter disbelief with how many times they kept bashing Trump over and over again when there were so many other more important issues going on in the world.

I still remember too when they went hard against him after he talked about pulling out of syria. Now he didnt, since trump is an unprincipled jackass, but we really shouldn't be in the middle east, and why is trump on their channel so much when there's more going on in the world than whatever he's thinking about? We don't need to know what trump is doing at all times. He's stupid.

[Rojava Free State]

My default is RTÉ for most Irish news, but honestly, I prefer social media or local sources. I'll usually read Breitbart for things outside of the country or in the US.

https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2019/12 ... you-crime/

Since someone else mentioned breitbart, I'm just gonna show you all the garbage that breitbart thinks passes for news

[Rojava Free State]

Remember when the K files hunted a man down for making a meme about them? Or when they played the edited tape of George Zimmerman saying "he looks suspicious, I think he's black" (they cut out the part where the 911 operator asked him what race the suspect was).

Can you please provide a link to this?

https://hotair.com/archives/ed-morrisse ... ling-meme/

https://www.cnn.com/2017/07/04/politics ... index.html

Imagine being so pathetic that you use a news crew reserves for stories on corruption and crime to track down a guy sitting behind a computer. CNN took a major L when they did this

[Korasta]

The Guardian, The I and sometimes The Independent. Used to use the BBC too, but they've gone downhill recently.

[Umpus]

Can you please provide a link to this?

https://hotair.com/archives/ed-morrisse ... ling-meme/

https://www.cnn.com/2017/07/04/politics ... index.html

Imagine being so pathetic that you use a news crew reserves for stories on corruption and crime to track down a guy sitting behind a computer. CNN took a major L when they did this

Daaaaaaaaaaaamn. Thank you for showing this to me, i'll be sure to stay away from CNN.

[Crockerland]

Newsy, and the interwebses.
But can anyone show me actual bias from CNN instead of just talking about it? No opinion pieces, please.

Well according to Business Insider, they falsely accused George Zimmerman of using a racial slur:
https://www.businessinsider.com/cnns-backtrack-on-george-zimmermans-alleged-racial-slur-is-a-disaster-2012-4

On March 22, CNN touted a "major development" in the Trayvon Martin case when it released a report including enhanced audio techniques that alleged George Zimmerman used a racial slur before shooting and killing the unarmed Martin. Now, the network is not so sure.
CNN's Gary Tuchman explored the audio, working with the network's audio design specialist to determine whether Zimmerman said the word "coons" before he shot Martin.

"It sounds like this allegation could be accurate," Tuchman said. "I wouldn't swear to it in court. But that's what it sounds like to me."

"It certainly sounds like that word to me," he later added.

On Wednesday, the network took a different tone when it released "new enhanced 911 audio." Zimmerman's attorneys told CNN that the word in question was "punks," not the racial slur. CNN checked this out with forensic audio expert Tom Owen, who agreed with Zimmerman's lawyers.

Later on Wednesday, Tuchman checked it out again for himself, working this time with one of CNN's "senior audio engineers."

"Some are accusing George Zimmerman of using the racial slur 'coons' in his 911 call," Tuchman says in his report. This is absurd, because CNN pretty much started the controversy in the first place.

According to Politifact, an ordained minister on a CNN panel spuriously claimed that Jesus was an illegal alien
https://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/sep/03/ryan-eller/jesus-was-undocumented-immigrant-ordained-minister/

An ordained minister on a CNN panel said people should choose their words carefully when discussing immigration, because even Jesus was "an undocumented immigrant."

The Rev. Ryan Eller, executive director of Define American, a nonprofit promoting awareness of immigration issues, told Carol Costello that word choice about the issue matters.

"Jesus was an undocumented immigrant himself when he fled to Egypt seeking persecution in his day," Eller said on Aug. 31, 2015. (Eller told PunditFact he meant "escaping persecution.") "And so the question becomes, would we call Jesus himself illegal if he were, you know, in our modern times?"

Jesus’ immigration status obviously isn’t the most important part of his personal story. But people were curious if this piece of trivia holds up.

In short, it doesn’t. The world in which Jesus lived was all a part of the Roman Empire, not necessarily a collection of separate sovereign nations. That makes it hard to call baby Jesus an illegal anything.

Politifact has also dinged CNN Tonight's Don Lemon for lying about gun laws.
https://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2014/aug/26/don-lemon/cnns-lemon-says-automatic-weapons-are-easy-get/

Fans of the Second Amendment have been chiding CNN’s Don Lemon for his comments about the sorts of guns you can legally buy in this country. They’ve said Lemon was confused, and his exchange with conservative radio host Ben Ferguson on Aug. 20, 2014, was embarrassing.

It began when Lemon, broadcasting live from Ferguson, Mo., said he supported the Second Amendment but that he doubted the Founding Fathers were thinking about automatic weapons when they wrote it. Ferguson shot back.

"Let’s deal with the facts here," Ferguson said. "A semi-automatic weapon is a gun that you or I is allowed to own and in different places they have different rules. But to imply that anyone can just go out and buy an automatic weapon is just not true, Don."

"What do you mean?" Lemon said. "During the theater shooting in Colorado, I was able to go and buy an automatic weapon, and I maybe have shot a gun three, four times in my life. I don’t live in Colorado. I think most people can go out and buy an automatic weapon."

This fact-check zeros in on Lemon’s claim that "most people can go out and buy an automatic weapon." The gun Lemon bought in Colorado was an AR-15. The version sold by the Bushmaster company is described as a semi-automatic. When Ferguson pointed out the difference between a fully automatic and an semi-automatic weapon, Lemon dismissed the distinction as a matter of semantics.

As Roque Planas writes for the Huffington Post, CNN's continued (most likely factually incorrect) attempts to racialize Zimmerman as a "white hispanic", emphasis on the white, were very telling of their desired angle for the story.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/cnn-white-hispanic_n_3588744

CNN is trying its hand at anthropology.

In a case that highlights continuing confusion over how to define Latino ethnicity, the television news network has set off a controversy over its continued use of the term “white Hispanic” to describe George Zimmerman, the man whose killing of unarmed, black Florida teenager Trayvon Martin set off a national debate about the persistence and nature of racism.

It’s an issue that’s simmered for as long as the Trayvon Martin case has been in the national spotlight. It reemerged on Thursday, when conservative news site Breitbart took CNN to task over its terminology.

By labeling Zimmerman a “white Hispanic,” they serve their obvious political bias, but also they cynically serve their financial interests by keeping the race angle as part of the story’s subtext.

Interestingly, CNN never referred to their former host, Rick Sanchez, as a “white Hispanic.” Wonder why.

[...]

The term “white Hispanic” refers to someone who is phenotypically white (of European blood), but is of Latin American or heritage. There’s lots of people who fit the description out there. Take, for example, Ted Cruz, who is super white, but Latino nonetheless:

Zimmerman is probably not one of them. Race is not a science. In fact, there’s no genetic foundation for it at all. It’s a social convention.

But within the context of that social convention, white refers to skin color. Zimmerman, like most Latinos, is likely of racially mixed heritage — what in most Latin American countries would be described as “mestizo.”

Also, not anything to do with bias, but one of their hosts (Reza Aslan) ate parts of a human brain one time, that was really creepy. Does nobody remember that? The Telegraph covered it. Not gonna link since that might not be PG-13 though considering he is committing cannibalism and eating human gore...

I prefer my news sources to go without the cannibalism.

[Forsher]

Mainstream media is largely corporatist, which influences how they report on things.

Oh for sure. You gotta understand everything you see on the media is heavily biased in favor of big business and the government

Well, that's just not true.

There are very few pro-government commentators.

Some parts of the government, such as the police, do get popular support... but as a whole, Western governments are unloved by Western Media.

[Outer Sparta]

Oh for sure. You gotta understand everything you see on the media is heavily biased in favor of big business and the government

Well, that's just not true.

There are very few pro-government commentators.

Some parts of the government, such as the police, do get popular support... but as a whole, Western governments are unloved by Western Media.

The BBC is highly pro-Tory. Not only do they let Tory politicians get away with lying and only throwing softball questions, but they consistently bash the Labour Party and often launch tirades against them. Not to mention they always say "Labour anti-Semitism" without mentioning the Tory party's anti-Semitism.

[Greattorn]

Russian Today

[Rojava Free State]

Oh for sure. You gotta understand everything you see on the media is heavily biased in favor of big business and the government

Well, that's just not true.

There are very few pro-government commentators.

Some parts of the government, such as the police, do get popular support... but as a whole, Western governments are unloved by Western Media.

Can't help but find that hard to believe when the media criticizes the president for supposedly wanting to pull out of a war that benefits the people in power. If the news was really anti government, don't you think they would be questioning every foreign war we were in from day one

[Rojava Free State]

Russian Today

You mean Vladimir Putin News Network?

[Proctopeo]

Local news, mostly. Other sources too, but never standalone.

Also, smoke signals.

[Outer Sparta]

Well, that's just not true.

There are very few pro-government commentators.

Some parts of the government, such as the police, do get popular support... but as a whole, Western governments are unloved by Western Media.

Can't help but find that hard to believe when the media criticizes the president for supposedly wanting to pull out of a war that benefits the people in power. If the news was really anti government, don't you think they would be questioning every foreign war we were in from day one

The news has no spine in calling out the government. They largely stand by the establishment.

[San Lumen]

Can't help but find that hard to believe when the media criticizes the president for supposedly wanting to pull out of a war that benefits the people in power. If the news was really anti government, don't you think they would be questioning every foreign war we were in from day one

The news has no spine in calling out the government. They largely stand by the establishment.

What are you talking about? What do you want the media to do that they aren’t doing?

[Genivaria]

I prefer ABC news or local news.

[2ndBritan]

propoganda sent bye the head of the united kingdom socialist party (CORBYN AND LABOUR)

[Forsher]

Well, that's just not true.

There are very few pro-government commentators.

Some parts of the government, such as the police, do get popular support... but as a whole, Western governments are unloved by Western Media.

The BBC is highly pro-Tory. Not only do they let Tory politicians get away with lying and only throwing softball questions, but they consistently bash the Labour Party and often launch tirades against them. Not to mention they always say "Labour anti-Semitism" without mentioning the Tory party's anti-Semitism.

Here's the thing about buying a particular model of car... as soon as you do, you start noticing all the other cars just like it. Why? Because it's relevant to you. It's why we don't use anecdotes, in singular, as representative data. We are not systematic observation machines. These things you notice? You think them because you're (based on your sig) pro-Labour.

You want a counter-example? Take the NZ Herald. Very few positive stories... although our government really is incompetent (and kind of corrupt)... but when National are in power (think a slightly more left-leaning version of the UK's Conservatives) they like the ministers/people/direction/vision without being pro-government.

Can't help but find that hard to believe when the media criticizes the president for supposedly wanting to pull out of a war that benefits the people in power. If the news was really anti government, don't you think they would be questioning every foreign war we were in from day one

What an absurd reduction.

You can oppose the idea of government and support (certain) foreign wars. You can be generally opposed to a government but support (aspects of) its foreign policy. You can be generally opposed to the government's foreign policy but generally supportive of it otherwise (how we might characterise neo-conservative views on Trump, for instance). The one has next to nothing to do with the other.

However, I think I misunderstood your point. You seem to be talking more about the Establishment/cultural capitalists. I understood your initial post to say "the media likes the instruments and institutions of government"... which is pretty clearly not really true (since relatively few people are, it's a small market to target).

[Krasny-Volny]

News Channel 5.

[San Lumen]

News Channel 5.

What network is that?

[Rojava Free State]

The BBC is highly pro-Tory. Not only do they let Tory politicians get away with lying and only throwing softball questions, but they consistently bash the Labour Party and often launch tirades against them. Not to mention they always say "Labour anti-Semitism" without mentioning the Tory party's anti-Semitism.

Here's the thing about buying a particular model of car... as soon as you do, you start noticing all the other cars just like it. Why? Because it's relevant to you. It's why we don't use anecdotes, in singular, as representative data. We are not systematic observation machines. These things you notice? You think them because you're (based on your sig) pro-Labour.

You want a counter-example? Take the NZ Herald. Very few positive stories... although our government really is incompetent (and kind of corrupt)... but when National are in power (think a slightly more left-leaning version of the UK's Conservatives) they like the ministers/people/direction/vision without being pro-government.

Can't help but find that hard to believe when the media criticizes the president for supposedly wanting to pull out of a war that benefits the people in power. If the news was really anti government, don't you think they would be questioning every foreign war we were in from day one

What an absurd reduction.

You can oppose the idea of government and support (certain) foreign wars. You can be generally opposed to a government but support (aspects of) its foreign policy. You can be generally opposed to the government's foreign policy but generally supportive of it otherwise (how we might characterise neo-conservative views on Trump, for instance). The one has next to nothing to do with the other.

However, I think I misunderstood your point. You seem to be talking more about the Establishment/cultural capitalists. I understood your initial post to say "the media likes the instruments and institutions of government"... which is pretty clearly not really true (since relatively few people are, it's a small market to target).

When most of the stories coming out of fox are pro trump anti Democrat and most stories from CNN are pro Democrat and anti trump, it's clear they're not truly anti government. If they were, they wouldn't be cool with either party and yet they both are two sides to the same coin. Biased media that helps people in power

[Sundiata]

PBS

[Nakena]

Mainstream Media and sometimes alternate outlets.

I am aware of the massive amounts of propaganda in MSM but I am able to filter it out for the most part and reading between the lines to get an idea what is going on. Where this isnt possible, deeper investigations can be conducted.

[Grinning Dragon]

I don't. Having one source to rely on causes bias and misinformation. Whenever an event happens, if I feel up to it, I normally search up multiple sources and try to connect the dots.

Like, really, imagine if I only watched Fox News, or CNN, or Buzzfeed. It would change my opinions on a matter, wouldn't it?

Same here and I do the same thing.
IMO, using only one source as your main source of news seems a bit illogical.