News or propaganda!

[rayg]

Just offering my opinion for what it's worth!

A number of articles on many of the major news sites are just the authors own opinion of a subject and as such presents and supports only their thoughts and opinions on a subject and were the article does not allow for any opposing comments I tend to stay away from these sites and and go to those that allow possible opposing comments or opinions of their article in an attempt to get all sides of the subject in order to help make my own decision!

Check the sites you go on to see what they are! Nothing wrong with an authors opinion but if it is just the authors opinion and does not allow opposing comments, thoughts, or opinions then I take it as political!

[Allen]

I usually believe something when or if I read the same article from different sites. Like most of you, from some sites I believe nothing.

I have found the Daily Mail and the New York Post ( not the NYT ) to be among the most trustworthy. The DM does get facts twisted at times I think due to rushing to be the first to publish things. That alone doesn't make their articles false.

[rayg]

Don't forget that the DM is overseas and their articles/information of an event will come out hours before the US ones do, and because of that time difference some information might change or be added from DM's initial post!

[Allen]

Don't forget that the DM is overseas and their articles/information of an event will come out hours before the US ones do, and because of that time difference some information might change or be added from DM's initial post!

Agree. I'm sure they have many reporters HERE but the publications come out across the pond about a half a day sooner. What I see so often is their news coming out 2 or 3 days before being reported here and so much that is never reported here. Sure, a lot of it is trivial stuff but a person can select what type of news or news from what country they are interested in.

[Roadkingtrax]

Confirmation bias.

[Johnny P]

Pulitzer awards for Russia Trump hoax bias comes to mind.

[JohnMOhio]

At one time, some years back, we had journalists working on newspapers and presenting the news on TV. They reported the actual facts as they knew it to be and could confirm the story line. Today it appears to me we have a bunch of so called news reporters that take some of the facts and give their opinions. None of which are verified at the time of their presentation either in the paper or on the air. If they are wrong the news paper corrections show up 7 or 8 pages into the paper, if at all, but their original story was front page. And of course, they fall back on "freedom of the Press" as an excuse.

[dryheat]

Too much news, whether early or late. DM; sorry, it sounds like The Enquirer, but not quite. Headlines attract looks. Hmm, not much has changed. I get feeds (I think that's what it's called) about everything under the sun. Man Bites Dog or The satellite saw something terrifying. There is some real news that is useful like, Lake Mead is unexpectedly filling up (provable to a point, water level is rising currently). The credit ceiling is not going to destroy humanity as we know it. For the time being!
I could do this, but I can't tell a lie. Oh, I've told lies, but I don't really like it.
Oh, by the way, is the credit ceiling the new Lay Off? You can't fire anyone, but if there is a layoff you clear the deck some. Sorry about that, it was the dept crisis.

[rayg]

In the DM you just read the items that pertain to the US or what you are interested in. It gets the news before the US sites! You don't have to read every article!

[Allen]

The subject here is "articles". That's why my comment only mentioned sites where you would read the news.

Personally I can read everything that interest me in 5 to 10 minutes vs watching TV for hours wasting time while the same stuff is repeated over and over w/o some items being mentioned at all. I prefer to do my own "pick and choose" news subjects rather than have it preached to me.