Chart of new organizations - Where are you getting your news?

[Barry]

[podfish]

I read the comments on a lot of different sites. I think the majority of the commentators on even WaPo would go more for this one: [Note the changes to the top and left labels from the original ]

[Valley Oak]

I have many different news sources that I read and listen to. But a few of my favorites include The Young Turks, Democracy Now!, The Huffington Post, El Pais, among others.

[arthunter]

This is an interesting thread ... Thanks for posting this, Barry ...

Personally, I think that all news should be verified and we have a bunch of intelligent and knowledgeable people in our community who are willing and able to do that. I have benefited greatly from the debates on this forum because I get the benefits of others research as well as my own ... These two articles illustrate the dangers of putting that power in someone else's hands

https://theintercept.com/2016/12/29/...pletely-false/

https://dcwatchdog.org/superstar-rep...nsorship-trap/

[Valley Oak]

Dearest Rosanne,

The media outlet, "The Intercept," is a reputable source of information.

However, your other link to "DC Watchdog" is a totally bogus, right-wing, conspiracy, fake news outlet as bad as Alex Jones' "Info Wars."

Practice what you preach. (Or maybe you don't really want to.)

Personally, I think that all news should be verified and we have a bunch of intelligent and knowledgeable people in our community who are willing and able to do that. ... These two articles illustrate the dangers of putting that power in someone else's hands...

[podfish]

Personally, I think that all news should be verified and we have a bunch of intelligent and knowledgeable people in our community who are willing and able to do that. I have benefited greatly from the debates on this forum because I get the benefits of others research as well as my own ...

those points are all sort of true - the least debatable is that news should be verified. I won't venture to comment on the intelligence and knowledge part...

but of course, it's not truly possible for absolute verification; intelligent people disagree quite often, and a lot of what passes for knowledge turns out to be prejudice or at best misinformation. And you certainly can see a lot of debate over the quality of the research offered in support or rebuttal. Whattaya gonna do, though? this is the best we got.

[arthunter]

I would rather you comment on the content, that being the credentials of the reporter voicing her opinions, than the vehicle ... I know nothing about this publication but I doubt that they made up a whole interview which is easily debunked ... I do believe that alternative media exists because the mainstream media is not doing its job very well ...

[arthunter]

tintelligent people disagree quite often, and a lot of what passes for knowledge turns out to be prejudice or at best misinformation. ...

I don't underestimate my fellow man and our collective intelligence ... If you have a prejudice then come out with it ... maybe it's valid ... Better that than blindly accepting all that we're told ... Our founding fathers understood the value of free speech...

[podfish]

I don't underestimate my fellow man and our collective intelligence ... If you have a prejudice then come out with it ... maybe it's valid ... Better that than blindly accepting all that we're told ... Our founding fathers understood the value of free speech...

understimating isn't the problem!! and I think that few who hold prejudices can 'come out with it' - they have no idea that they're prejudiced. The most topical example, because of the current election and BLM movement, is that of racism. Of course no-one's racist, if you ask them, but I suspect people of color who know them might disagree. Prejudice, bias, whatever you want to call it, is built in to the animal. Don't forget the Dunning–Kruger effect, which is very well established. People echo the phrase 'echo chamber' without fully realizing it applies to themselves as well.

to apply this to the topic at hand -- yes, you must be skeptical of the news coming in. That doesn't mean automatically believing some and disbelieving others. It applies to every bit of information you come across. Expecting 'verification' is expecting a lot. More things are disproved than are proved; more things turn out to be unlikely than turn out to be 'true'. This usually is said about reality, but this fits as well: 'truth, what a concept!'

[arthunter]

understimating isn't the problem!! ...'

Let me clarify ... By prejudice I do not mean racial prejudice or religious prejudice or sexual prejudice or even economic prejudice, I mean a prejudice against certain corporations or philosophies which might be valid because of the harm to mankind involved ... I have said many times in this forum and elsewhere that prejudice between people serves a purpose, and that purpose is to divide, conquer and distract ... Most people that I know are not prejudiced in this way, ...

Regarding the news, often verification is easy ... To verify the opinions of the reporter in the second article that I posted you simply contact her and ask her if she said these things .. end of subject ... Is it always this easy? ... No, of course not, and that's where analysis comes in ... Are we capable of such analysis? ... Yes, we are and that's me not underestimating our collective intelligence ...