[Dana1963]

Originally Posted by Bucco

Don't use them....read established media with strong principaled editorial practice.

Frankly, as we have seen, most stories have tapes or videos as back up.

Reputable sources, like the Times, Post, etc are well known for a reason, and you can trust them.

It's time to retire the comment/tweets ”Fake News”.

[Polar Bear]

Originally Posted by Bucco

...Reputable sources, like the Times, Post, etc are well known for a reason, and you can trust them.

Boy is that ever a matter of opinion.

They may have facts buried somewhere among their opinions, but their opinions dominate their “reporting” so much that I cannot accept it as true journalism.

[Bucco]

Originally Posted by Polar Bear

Boy is that ever a matter of opinion.

They may have facts buried somewhere among their opinions, but their opinions dominate their “reporting” so much that I cannot accept it as true journalism.

I suppose it could be.

But, the Times is considered the single best source for news in the world. I have been reading the Times, among others for many years, and knowing the journalistic exercise the reporters are required it is a great source.

I also suppose, well I know...attitude of the reader is important. I have gone to the news "above the fold" in the Times, expecting to read certain news, only to be disappointed in what happened. That helps me, because I approach my news as a learning experience, and not a validation of what I think.

The summary, usually on page 2 is a great way to begin your day.

I seldom read the Times opinion pieces, not because I disagree, but I prefer to make my opinions based on the facts. Now, admittedly, I have left the Times and checked other sources...never a cable news show, and if needed continue to read.

Reuters is a good source....PBS is usually dependable.

Again, attitude of the reader is important. If you are looking for factual news, I, and most of the world consider the Times top notch, but if you simply want easy validation of what you already think, it's not for you.

[Polar Bear]

Originally Posted by Bucco

I suppose it could be.

But, the Times is considered the single best source for news in the world...

...I, and most of the world consider the Times top notch, but if you simply want easy validation of what you already think, it's not for you.

This, the rest of your praise for the Times, and your condescending observations regarding those who don’t agree with you, are nothing but your opinions.

I will say that I don’t consider the Times quite as unjournalistic as the Post, but that’s not saying much.

[Lindsyburnsy]

I don't ever having to fact check prior to 2016.

Originally Posted by Bucco

I do the same in checking valid reputable sources on both sides, ignoring opinion pieces, and find MOST ALL AGREE every time on anything substantive.

Problem is the fringe "sources" skew facts, and even videos.

Then, knowing facts and truth, I allow myself to listen to opinions, and in doing so learn the maturity level of those folks, and gradually whittle down those folks al.

Valid news media like the Times, Post, etc pretty much have editorial process in place that insures you are getting the straight scoop.

[Bucco]

Originally Posted by Polar Bear

This, the rest of your praise for the Times, and your condescending observations regarding those who don’t agree with you, are nothing but your opinions.

I will say that I don’t consider the Times quite as unjournalistic as the Post, but that’s not saying much.

Curious...do you have a specific reason for your doubts ?

I ask because they are both internationally respected, and have been for many many years, thus my question.

However, if you find my post to be condescending when it is simply a known and accepted world wide fact, I can only imagine your comments to my question.

10 Journalism Brands Where You Find Real Facts Rather Than Alternative Facts

[Polar Bear]

Originally Posted by Bucco

Curious...do you have a specific reason for your doubts ?...

I don’t have doubts. I know how I feel about them.

Originally Posted by Bucco

...I ask because they are both internationally respected...

By many I do not question. There are also many who don’t.

And regarding your post being condescending...

Originally Posted by Bucco

...but if you simply want easy validation of what you already think, it's not for you.

If somebody wanted to put together an example of condescending quotes, this would fit right in.

[Going My Way]

Originally Posted by Bucco

However, if you find my post to be condescending when it is simply a known and accepted world wide fact, I can only imagine your comments to my question.

10 Journalism Brands Where You Find Real Facts Rather Than Alternative Facts

Just the Runner Up List from your LINK scares me....

[paulajr]

"Fact Check" sites are all biased...so why bother!?

[graciegirl]

Originally Posted by Dana1963

It's time to retire the comment/tweets ”Fake News”.

Fake News is not exactly an accurate wording. Almost all of the mainstream media show their opinions rather than give just an accurate presentation of what happened, when it happened and how it happened. They are always adding why they think it happened... AND most of even the accurate media is biased left. Couple that with derisive facial expressions and raised eyebrows and eye rolling...it does manage to communicate disdain and derision. That is a fact. Although half of the country is right of center, we are subjected to the opinion of the Television News and National News Channels that almost all are very biased and left leaning.

They don't lie. They use descriptors that are demeaning and critical and unkind. They will say he "scoffed at" instead of he was "critical of" . There are so many examples, over and over every day from all of the even responsible news sources that would make my excellent high school journalism teacher wet her socks.

Those who think the way the writers write don't see it or feel it or find issue with it. I do. Every damned day.

[Taltarzac725]

Some "news" sources are more entertainment than "news". And they are very easy to spot.

[Bucco]

Originally Posted by graciegirl

Fake News is not exactly an accurate wording. Almost all of the mainstream media show their opinions rather than give just an accurate presentation of what happened, when it happened and how it happened. They are always adding why they think it happened... AND most of even the accurate media is biased left. Couple that with derisive facial expressions and raised eyebrows and eye rolling...it does manage to communicate disdain and derision. That is a fact. Although half of the country is right of center, we are subjected to the opinion of the Television News and National News Channels that almost all are very biased and left leaning.

They don't lie. They use descriptors that are demeaning and critical and unkind. They will say he "scoffed at" instead of he was "critical of" . There are so many examples, over and over every day from all of the even responsible news sources that would make my excellent high school journalism teacher wet her socks.

Those who think the way the writers write don't see it or feel it or find issue with it. I do. Every damned day.

When do you believe all the things you critique began ?

Been around politics pretty much my entire adult life....it’s new to me.

[Bucco]

Originally Posted by Polar Bear

I don’t have doubts. I know how I feel about them.

By many I do not question. There are also many who don’t.

And regarding your post being condescending...

If somebody wanted to put together an example of condescending quotes, this would fit right in.

Ok...enjoy..have a nice evening

[ruralgoddess]

amen

[mrrmauu]

Originally Posted by Bucco

Don't use them....read established media with strong principaled editorial practice.

Frankly, as we have seen, most stories have tapes or videos as back up.

Reputable sources, like the Times, Post, etc are well known for a reason, and you can trust them.

Whew lad! You sure are stretching the term “reputable” . Thanks for the early morning chuckle!