Best Online News Sources? Paid or Unpaid?

[beeatnik]

There’s a difference between the Guardian and NYT?

[takashi]

There’s a difference between the Guardian and NYT?

What is your preferred news source?

[beeatnik]

Preferred Sources.


Local interest, food, sports (the trivial or inconsequential): LA Times

Travel: NYT

Europe and ME: Grayzone

Culture and Health: unherd.com

US political and current events: Twitter and Substack citizen journalism. The whole umbrella, including disgraced former mainstream media journalists (Taibbi, Greenwald), conspiratorial marxist accounts and major non-western feeds (RT, aljazeera, etc).

A regular at my favorite dive bar used to write for The Guardian. I asked him if he left due to the economics of the post-print media landscape. Spewing the most colorful Brit expletives, he accused The Guardian of being a right wing corporate rag. Bias, man.

What is your preferred news source?

[echappist]

A regular at my favorite dive bar used to write for The Guardian. I asked him if he left due to the economics of the post-print media landscape. Spewing the most colorful Brit expletives, he accused The Guardian of being a right wing corporate rag. Bias, man.

Couldn't be wider of the mark. And given that this is a single-source commentary from a former employee (the circumstances of whose separation from the organization is unknown), a comment to be take with huge grain of salt.

The Guardian has always maintained a left-of-center editorial stance, with some occasional columnist going quite left (as in Corbin Soviet-philia left). Perhaps someone with views more aligned with the Daily Worker might call it right wing corporate rag, but both in substance and in reputation, it is decidedly not right wing.

To wit, it recently ran a sport column titled As the World Series approaches, baseball still struggles with racial bias. Yes, a typically right wing rag would definitely publish such an article.

The actual right wing corporate rag is actually the Daily Telegraph (aka Torygraph).

The paper of record is the Times of London (center right). The paper of commerce is the Financial Times (with stance most comparable to that of The Economist).

To end this on a lighter note, the list of papers makes for a convenient segue to this clip from Yes, Minister on the various British newspapers (skip to ~0:50 for the start of actual joke).

[beeatnik]

Just shared the anecdote to illustrate how my perception of The Guardian as a Pravdaesque organ of radical progressive ideology isn’t shared by my left-leaning barfly pal.

Couldn't be wider of the mark. And given that this is a single-source commentary from a former employee (the circumstances of whose separation from the organization is unknown), a comment to be take with huge grain of salt.

The Guardian has always maintained a left-of-center editorial stance, with some occasional columnist going quite left (as in Corbin Soviet-philia left). Perhaps someone with views more aligned with the Daily Worker might call it right wing corporate rag, but both in substance and in reputation, it is decidedly not right wing.

To wit, it recently ran a sport column titled As the World Series approaches, baseball still struggles with racial bias. Yes, a typically right wing rag would definitely publish such an article.

The actual right wing corporate rag is actually the Daily Telegraph (aka Torygraph).

The paper of record is the Times of London (center right). The paper of commerce is the Financial Times (with stance most comparable to that of The Economist).

To end this on a lighter note, the list of papers makes for a convenient segue to this clip from Yes, Minister on the various British newspapers (skip to ~0:50 for the start of actual joke).

[Too Tall]

I've been reading WaPo since my High School history teacher arranged for no consequences newsprint reading during her lectures.

Buh bye beeches. May the bird of paridise fly up you nose.

[Marvinlungwitz]

Interesting tines when Taylor Swift and Beyoncé exhibit more political courage than two of our largest newspapers.

[bigbill]

As an information warfare guy, I guess I don't get the outrage over a newspaper not supporting a candidate. Are so emotionally invested in a candidate that everything is all or nothing? I want a media that presents the news without providing me an opinion, and that keeps opinion pieces out of the news. I don't seek out media based on how well it aligns with my personal beliefs. My social media is flooded with opinions in the form of "news" that folks share because it aligns with their beliefs, factual or not. I just want November 5th to be over, although I doubt it will be before December.

As a nation, I have serious concerns about outside influence in the final week before the election. We know Russian, Iran, and North Korea have and will continue to sow discord in our society, seeking to further divide a nation already split 50/50. If Harris wins the popular vote and loses the Electoral, which is a real possibility, we'll see media flooded with how the Electoral College needs to be abandoned. And, no matter who wins, will Congress and the Senate be willing to work with the opposite party?

Our choices are poor this year, and I think it will take until 2028 to get a fresh group of candidates that understand "moderate."