A question about US News coverage

[JedExodus]

Everyone knows Fox News is jaded towards a right-wing stance. but the little i've seen of American news is always biased to either a left-wing or right-wing position.

Is there any major news source in the states that totally isn't jaded one way or the other? We have the same deal over here (and everywhere else) but it's never ever as blatant as in the states (apart from in the tabloids)

The reason I ask is because I hate being told what I should think, I just want facts, I don't want an anchor spouting rhetoric at me. it all just seems a bit...sinister

[Harald B]

While far from "major" in any way, you may be interested in The Real News. They don't run ads or take subsidies because they don't want to be in anyone's pocket. And unlike your average news site they're all video and have professional journalists (it was started by journalists fed up with the usual media biases), many local correspondents, fairly in-depth interviews and big ambitions.
I won't say they're always neutral or correct, but they are independent, know their stuff and show you things you won't often get in regular media. And with pretty good production values.

[JedExodus]

Checked it out, there's definitely a left-wing tilt to it, but the quality of journalism is far higher than the mainstream stuff I usually see from the states

[Steve2000]

I find the News Hour on PBS to be pretty good. It is definitely produced for an older audience, but it isn't bad. Plus, since it is on PBS, no commercials once they actually start the news. One of their regular features is a discussion between the Host (Jim Lehrer) and two newspaper columnists. It is usually Mark Shields (a left-leaning writer) and David Brooks (a very conservative writer). They usually are on to comment on political things.

They recently started some sort of makeover to the show, but I haven't watched in the last month or so, so I am not sure what is different.

[Emily]

Cable news tends to be biased one way or the other, but not the regular broadcast networks. (In my opinion, anyway - but maybe it's hard for me to tell since I tend to agree with the more left-wing reporting. ) But they still don't always report on the stuff I wish they'd report on...

[Kroms]

Fox News's Rupert Murdoch looks at news as a business. He and almost everyone else on that channel probably don't believe half the stuff they broadcast. For example: Fox is very liberal in China, which helps serve their financial interests (though a Chinese liberal might have the same view point that Glenn Beck pretends to have, for all I know).

In general, though, there's very few non-partisan broadcasters. Even outside of politics, there's just way too much money to be made by being sensational. This is why, in all the fervour about Michael Jackson being dead or Angelina Jolie being pregnant, there's just no room to broadcast about important things, like this poor woman**, or the passing of Norman Borlaug.

I tend to read and watch everything to get a general objectivity about what's going on***. Actually - this is weird - but Jon Stewart is pretty much the only non-partisan newscaster in the West right now. I mean, sure, he pretends it's all comedy, but you do also get the news, plain and without any dressing.

*I should say "I hope he pretends to have." That man scares me. I refuse to believe that someone could actually be that delusional.
**Story may induce rage. You've been warned.
***Though Fox do seem more of a comedy channel at times; that was my first impression of them, by the way: that they were a comedy channel. For those first five minutes, Ann Coulter was my favorite comedian ever. Then, realization hit.

[Fealiks]

Originally Posted by Harald B

While far from "major" in any way, you may be interested in The Real News. They don't run ads or take subsidies because they don't want to be in anyone's pocket. And unlike your average news site they're all video and have professional journalists (it was started by journalists fed up with the usual media biases), many local correspondents, fairly in-depth interviews and big ambitions.
I won't say they're always neutral or correct, but they are independent, know their stuff and show you things you won't often get in regular media. And with pretty good production values.

Sounds like the Giant Bomb of news organizations.

[JedExodus]

Originally Posted by Steve2000

One of their regular features is a discussion between the Host (Jim Lehrer) and two newspaper columnists. It is usually Mark Shields (a left-leaning writer) and David Brooks (a very conservative writer). They usually are on to comment on political things.

Let's hope it's a bit better than Hannity & Colmes, that man does nothing for the left-wing agenda god help him

Originally Posted by Emily

but maybe it's hard for me to tell since I tend to agree with the more left-wing reporting. ) But they still don't always report on the stuff I wish they'd report on...

Yeah I hear you there, I lean to the left somewhat, but I still hate it when I see for example some crazed shooter and the left-wing channel's blaming it on gun control and the right-wing are blaming it on the media (games, music, microwave meals, whatever) it's just not the news's place to do that outside of pundits that can say whatever they like as far as i'm concerned as long as they have some opposition from time to time

Originally Posted by Kroms

Fox News's Rupert Murdoch looks at news as a business. He and almost everyone else on that channel probably don't believe half the stuff they broadcast. For example: Fox is very liberal in China, which helps serve their financial interests (though a Chinese liberal might have the same view point that Glenn Beck pretends to have, for all I know).

The Murdoch machine's a funny old beast, for all it's right-wing tendancies it just wants to make money at the end of the day (and fair enough I say) that's why you see it publishing books by Michael Moore (if you can't say anything nice...) ad taking different stances in different locations. In the UK it's slightly tilted to the right with The Sun and The Times (which is actually my paper of choice, you just have to be wary because it can be quite subtle while being somewhat biased) there's Sky News as well but I never watch it.

[Derwin]

Originally Posted by Steve2000

I find the News Hour on PBS to be pretty good.

Completely agreed.

[GuybrushWilco]

I think that generally speaking CNN is more centered. MSNBC is more to the left and Fox News is to the right. You will never find this to always be 100% though. Certainly the BBC has struggled with issues of bias over the years.

[JedExodus]

Originally Posted by GuybrushWilco

Certainly the BBC has struggled with issues of bias over the years.

I dunno, the BBC gets it from all sides. One time I was at a lecture being given by the sanctimonious Scottish midget known as George Galloway who "hilariously" reffered to it as the "Bush and Blair Corporation." Turned on BBC that night and there was extensive coverage that questioned the Iraq war.

They seem to be a victim of their own high standards, not perfect but pretty damn good most of the time I think

[GuybrushWilco]

Originally Posted by JedExodus

I dunno, the BBC gets it from all sides. One time I was at a lecture being given by the sanctimonious Scottish midget known as George Galloway who "hilariously" reffered to it as the "Bush and Blair Corporation." Turned on BBC that night and there was extensive coverage that questioned the Iraq war.

They seem to be a victim of their own high standards, not perfect but pretty damn good most of the time I think

Well I don't want to get into a lot of politics on here, but there have been times when the BBC has been accused of having a political agenda. I have seen it myself too. I don't think they are as bad as they used to be though, I think they cleaned up their act a lot.

[JedExodus]

Originally Posted by GuybrushWilco

Well I don't want to get into a lot of politics on here, but there have been times when the BBC has been accused of having a political agenda. I have seen it myself too. I don't think they are as bad as they used to be though, I think they cleaned up their act a lot.

Maybe moreso in the past but as far as i've witnessed theyve been pretty neutral, I can't really think of a time I watched a report and thought "Hang on a second..." they get grief from MP's all the time but that hardly means anything as MP's will complain about anything in Britain.

Seriously though, i'd really like an example of BBC making a muck of things if you can think of any, it'd be interesting

[Secret Fawful]

I don't see the problem with political bias or how its not news. It's not that they're lying to you, they're just showing it from their point of view. And let's face it, FoxNews was made for Republicans and MSNBC was made for Liberals and CNN for Democrats and so on. Go where you'll find the viewpoint you agree with, I dunno.

I think there's way too much anti-government anti-party paranoia on every side. I'm personally an independent, though I tend to lean to the right. Sure there ARE politicians who lie through their face and talk out their arse at the same time. But I tend to see Republicans label the Liberals as the evil biased homo satanist Libs and the Liberals label the Repubs as the evil fundamentalist religious conspiracy theorist nutcases. Neither party is really that bad! There is so much fighting coming from both sides because human beings hate other human beings, especially ones that disagree with them. Anybody who stereotypes either party as such has no clue what they are saying and have let the media tell them what to believe for way too long.

[S@bre]

I wonder how you Americans put up with how you get news coverage on TV. I watch it on infrequently - now and then I'll turn to Fox News if I want a laugh - but its so in-your-face and unreserved appeal-to-the-lowest-common-denominator. Not to mention the overt political commentary. Maybe its just because it lacks that British sense of cool stiff upper lip that you get with the BBC and ITN (but not Sky, but thats bastard Murdoch again), but it feels like it was put together teens. I just can't stand it. I really hate it when I'm in another country and I can't pick up BBC World Service and have to make do with CNN.

[GuybrushWilco]

Originally Posted by S@bre

I wonder how you Americans put up with how you get news coverage on TV. I watch it on infrequently - now and then I'll turn to Fox News if I want a laugh - but its so in-your-face and unreserved appeal-to-the-lowest-common-denominator. Not to mention the overt political commentary. Maybe its just because it lacks that British sense of cool stiff upper lip that you get with the BBC and ITN (but not Sky, but thats bastard Murdoch again), but it feels like it was put together teens. I just can't stand it. I really hate it when I'm in another country and I can't pick up BBC World Service and have to make do with CNN.

I hate to say it, but this sounds a little bit pompous. CNN is a highly respected international news organization and is the first 24 hour news network. I'm sorry our colonial news doesn't fit to the stiff up lip British sensibilities. I guess it should be left to the unwashed masses :P

[Friar]

Originally Posted by GuybrushWilco

I hate to say it, but this sounds a little bit pompous. CNN is a highly respected international news organization and is the first 24 hour news network. I'm sorry our colonial news doesn't fit to the stiff up lip British sensibilities. I guess it should be left to the unwashed masses :P

I have to say, when i visited the US during Michael Jacksons trial (i was in disney world =P) the coverage was all "poor MJ!", whereas over here they seemed alot more neutral. Mainly facts, and reconstructed testimonies (i.e some middle aged man reading out some kids testimony). I have no idea which network we had to watch in the US (definately either Fox or CNN, but i have a sneaky suspician it was both), but it was definately different.

[GuybrushWilco]

I don't get BBC World, but I do visit the BBC News website on a daily basis. I remember they covered Jackson's death on their site way too much as well.

[Friar]

Originally Posted by GuybrushWilco

I don't get BBC World, but I do visit the BBC News website on a daily basis. I remember they covered Jackson's death on their site way too much as well.

There was on overload of info on Sky (which i was watching at the time), but they seemed to be neutral. I think thats probably down to how the americans generally appreciated/loved him more, so the effect seems less.

[JedExodus]

Originally Posted by Secret Fawful

I don't see the problem with political bias or how its not news.

For a start it goes against every professional ethic of journalism, and sometimes it's hard to even notice. For example The Independent is a left-wing British broadsheet, it's not unusal to see every paper running a story on a big world event on their front-page while they run an article about plastic bag use or something on there's. It's certainly a big issue and i'm not trying to take any legitimacy away from it, but it's selective and subtle, keep getting your news from the same source and it does effect your opinion

Originally Posted by S@bre

I wonder how you Americans put up with how you get news coverage on TV. I watch it on infrequently - now and then I'll turn to Fox News if I want a laugh - but its so in-your-face and unreserved appeal-to-the-lowest-common-denominator..

Two words "Action News"

Originally Posted by S@bre

Maybe its just because it lacks that British sense of cool stiff upper lip that you get with the BBC and ITN

Wut? ITN's a joke (especially of late), it's tabloid journalism full of emotional language and showbiz stories, even good ol' Trevor McDonald couldn't hide that under his layers of class. Personally Channel 4's news is probably the best, even if it is far too agressive at times

Originally Posted by GuybrushWilco

I don't get BBC World, but I do visit the BBC News website on a daily basis. I remember they covered Jackson's death on their site way too much as well.

Jacko's death was a pretty legitimate news story in my opinion, it had it all. It was unexpected, the man was absolutely massive, there was/is a hint of sinisterness and people running to grab the mans wealth. It was like Elvis's death to my generation. I don't think the BBC website's too bad for sensationalism outside of its entertainment section