Jump to content

Independent Journalism Recommendations


Chickensguys
 Share

Recommended Posts

Well, the only English language news sources I trust to be more or less completely independent are The Independent Barents Observer and High North News.

 

However, I'm sure you could find unbiased articles in many major news outlets but they're mixed with a whole bunch of biased articles as well so you have to make sure you judge each and every article instead of the entire outlet as a whole.

Huh, so what I do with RT, Anti-War.com, Breitbart, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NYT, LAT, CST, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Huh, so what I do with RT, Anti-War.com, Breitbart, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NYT, LAT, CST, etc.

 

Pretty much! You just gotta be real critical these days :P

 

The only news sources I'm not that critical of because I trust them are the ones I mentioned in my last post and that's basically what an unbiased news source is to me, when you don't have to be constantly critical of what you're reading because you're certain that the source is legit.

 

I'd say, if you find a huffpo article on something, find a foxnews article on same topic, read both, now you can find the truth yourself.

 

That's what I do a lot of the time. It's why I started reading RT to begin with, so I could get the Russian and generally anti-Western view of international events.

orwell_s_1984_oceania_s_currency_by_dungsc127_d97k1zt-fullview.jpg.9994c8f495b96849443aa0defa8730be.jpg

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty much! You just gotta be real critical these days :P

 

The only news sources I'm not that critical of because I trust them are the ones I mentioned in my last post and that's basically what an unbiased news source is to me, when you don't have to be constantly critical of what you're reading because you're certain that the source is legit.

 

 

That's what I do a lot of the time. It's why I started reading RT to begin with, so I could get the Russian and generally anti-Western view of international events.

What disturbed me most about RT, is how it took a progressive line on most USA internal political issues.  As a progressive myself, believe me, I did seriously ask myself "Why are our enemies encouraging this line of thinking that I support?".  And I'm still pretty uncomfortable with that.

Edited by Aisha Greyjoy

Duke of House Greyjoy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What disturbed me most about RT, is how it took a progressive line on most USA internal political issues.  As a progressive myself, believe me, I did seriously ask myself "Why are our enemies encouraging this line of thinking that I support?".  And I'm still pretty uncomfortable with that.

 

Well, that's a really good question. I would assume they're just doing it as a way of creating division and instability, playing on the political tension in the US. I just read this article on RT a little while ago and it's pretty.. harsh. You can really tell they want to convince people that NATO is aggressive and dishonest and it's really fascinating to see the kind of language they use in these types of articles.

orwell_s_1984_oceania_s_currency_by_dungsc127_d97k1zt-fullview.jpg.9994c8f495b96849443aa0defa8730be.jpg

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What disturbed me most about RT, is how it took a progressive line on most USA internal political issues.  As a progressive myself, believe me, I did seriously ask myself "Why are our enemies encouraging this line of thinking that I support?".  And I'm still pretty uncomfortable with that.

 

When the western narrative be it on wars or on other things is based on lies and nonsense then RT who has no reason to support their narrative will likely have the correct/progressive/alt-right/all view on the matter. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When the western narrative be it on wars or on other things is based on lies and nonsense then RT who has no reason to support their narrative will likely have the correct/progressive/alt-right/all view on the matter. 

 

If you think the Russian narrative is based on anything other than lies and nonsense you're mistaken. Both sides are full of shit. I don't understand how you can be so critical of Western media bias and then completely ignore bias from media in other places. They aren't any less prone to lies and dishonesty than journalists in the West.

 

Also, I was under the impression that liberals and democrats are usually classified as progressives.

 

Progressivism in the United States is a broadly based reform movement that reached its height early in the 20th century and is generally considered to be middle class and reformist in nature. It arose as a response to the vast changes brought by modernization, such as the growth of large corporations and railroads, and fears of corruption in American politics. In the 21st century, progressives continue to embrace concepts such as environmentalism and social justice.[1]Social progressivism, the view that governmental practices ought to be adjusted as society evolves, forms the ideological basis for many American progressives.

 

That doesn't sound particularly alt-right to me, except maybe the part about corruption in American politics. I mean, you talk about making America great again. Not making America great, but great again. What this implies to me is that you seek to return to a previous state in which you believe America was great. But this isn't progressive, it's regressive by definition (which doesn't necessarily have to be a negative term). You seek progress not by moving forward but by moving backwards, to what was. You seem to want to revert or return to something that used to be, which you could certainly consider to be progress but I don't think I can agree that it qualifies as progressive, at least not according the definition above nor according to the philosophy of progressivism based on the Idea of Progress.

 

Fox News is  fair and balance

 

nrYVwg3.jpg

Edited by Big Brother

orwell_s_1984_oceania_s_currency_by_dungsc127_d97k1zt-fullview.jpg.9994c8f495b96849443aa0defa8730be.jpg

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you think the Russian narrative is based on anything other than lies and nonsense you're mistaken. Both sides are full of shit. I don't understand how you can be so critical of Western media bias and then completely ignore bias from media in other places. They aren't any less prone to lies and dishonesty than journalists in the West.

 

Also, I was under the impression that liberals and democrats are usually classified as progressives.

 

 

That doesn't sound particularly alt-right to me, except maybe the part about corruption in American politics. I mean, you talk about making America great again. Not making America great, but great again. What this implies to me is that you seek to return to a previous state in which you believe America was great. But this isn't progressive, it's regressive by definition (which doesn't necessarily have to be a negative term). You seek progress not by moving forward but by moving backwards, to what was. You seem to want to revert or return to something that used to be, which you could certainly consider to be progress but I don't think I can agree that it qualifies as progressive, at least not according the definition above nor according to the philosophy of progressivism based on the Idea of Progress.

 

What did I just tell you? You can trust them on some things and not on others. When you got for example a group of headchoppers that the western media has been told by the government to sell as Democracy loving peaceniks (exaggeration) and they're saying that yes, they are a group of headchoppers then yeah, they're being more truthful. When western media pushes a ridiclous lie than anything to the contrary to it tends to be closer to the truth.

 

You make a couple of mistakes there. First you assume that "Make America Great Again" is going back to how it was in the past, a common error among those who have failed to understand the appeal in it. The old way was "Free Trade" that led us to all this, while MAGA sold itself on protectionism (or fair trade as Trump likes to call it) which is the exact opposite.

 

Second you mention the myth of progressivism, that there is a straight line and they are the forward path and anyone who opposes them is against the future and will soon be in the dustbin of history. Sorry but no. Progressivism to a great deal of people, and I'd even say the majority is in fact a regression, not directly back as like I said it ain't a straight line, but diagonally back. It is just as flawed as the old ways and the balance we will achieve in the future of a Nationalist (not internationalist) way which is accepting of people but uses some common sense will wipe their failed ideology out.

 

nrYVwg3.jpg

 

You may laugh but on the election you could say they were, especially during the primaries and up to the mid point of Trump's campaign at the very least. They attacked Trump plenty and gave plenty of anti-Trump guys time to hit him. The rest by comparison were going to war with Trump throughout in such extreme ways that yeah... Fox compared to them was balanced you could say which is not something I'd think I'd ever have to say.

I mean we've had MSM sources that have outright admitted they lied regarding Trump due to getting triggered and will be "recommitting themselves to the truth". You don't get that if they weren't grossly biased like they were.

Edited by Rozalia
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What did I just tell you? You can trust them on some things and not on others. When you got for example a group of headchoppers that the western media has been told by the government to sell as Democracy loving peaceniks (exaggeration) and they're saying that yes, they are a group of headchoppers then yeah, they're being more truthful. When western media pushes a ridiclous lie than anything to the contrary to it tends to be closer to the truth.

Seems I misread your post. Still, I would consider it dangerous to assume that whenever Western media lies about a case, Russian media is telling the truth or that they're even closer to it.

 

You make a couple of mistakes there. First you assume that "Make America Great Again" is going back to how it was in the past, a common error among those who have failed to understand the appeal in it. The old way was "Free Trade" that led us to all this, while MAGA sold itself on protectionism (or fair trade as Trump likes to call it) which is the exact opposite.

 

I don't know about that, based on what I've seen from Trump supporters plenty of them seem to express a desire to return to the "good 'ol days". Despite what its appeal might be, the phrase very much implies that people seek to return to a time when America was great.

 

Second you mention the myth of progressivism, that there is a straight line and they are the forward path and anyone who opposes them is against the future and will soon be in the dustbin of history. Sorry but no. Progressivism to a great deal of people, and I'd even say the majority is in fact a regression, not directly back as like I said it ain't a straight line, but diagonally back. It is just as flawed as the old ways and the balance we will achieve in the future of a Nationalist (not internationalist) way which is accepting of people but uses some common sense will wipe their failed ideology out.

 

I fail to see how anything I wrote about progressivism implies that "they are the forward path and anyone who opposes them is against the future and will soon be in the dustbin of history". I believe that is just your own animosity towards the term.

 

If progressivism to the majority is in fact regression as you say, I can only conclude that means that the majority is regressive and seeks to regress, and that regression is what that same majority actually perceive as progress.

 

You may laugh but on the election you could say they were, especially during the primaries and up to the mid point of Trump's campaign at the very least. They attacked Trump plenty and gave plenty of anti-Trump guys time to hit him. The rest by comparison were going to war with Trump throughout in such extreme ways that yeah... Fox compared to them was balanced you could say which is not something I'd think I'd ever have to say.

I mean we've had MSM sources that have outright admitted they lied regarding Trump due to getting triggered and will be "recommitting themselves to the truth". You don't get that if they weren't grossly biased like they were.

 

It hardly matters if they were more balanced in regards to Trump, they're still terribly unbalanced and biased compared to credible, truthful media and we should accept nothing less than that.

Edited by Big Brother

orwell_s_1984_oceania_s_currency_by_dungsc127_d97k1zt-fullview.jpg.9994c8f495b96849443aa0defa8730be.jpg

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems I misread your post. Still, I would consider it dangerous to assume that whenever Western media lies about a case, Russian media is telling the truth or that they're even closer to it.

 

Considering the extremes of the western media... yeah, I'd say assuming the Russian line when it comes to headchoppers and some other subjects is a pretty safe bet.

 

I don't know about that, based on what I've seen from Trump supporters plenty of them seem to express a desire to return to the "good 'ol days". Despite what its appeal might be, the phrase very much implies that people seek to return to a time when America was great.

 

Lets make X sports club great again. Does that imply bringing back old players? Playing in the old way that might be an outdated form of play? Getting the manager of that time? No. That which you've mentioned was pushed because the line they wanted to push was, "The old days were the time of the KKK and they want that back, I mean it is LITERALLY HITLER we're talking about here". How do you not realise this? Trump was very clear on this matter in that MAGA was mostly regarding jobs. America is ruined due to globalism but he will make it great again by defeating the globalists. Thats it. No, "I will bring back slavery", or any other such guff.

 

I fail to see how anything I wrote about progressivism implies that "they are the forward path and anyone who opposes them is against the future and will soon be in the dustbin of history". I believe that is just your own animosity towards the term.

 

If progressivism to the majority is in fact regression as you say, I can only conclude that means that the majority is regressive and seeks to regress, and that regression is what that same majority actually perceive as progress.

 

And where did I hit you for that? A reason at the end I used "their" and not "your". I simply said what you mentioned of "progress" is how the Porgressives see it and that it is bunk.

 

You are aware that regression these days is far more associated with Progressives themselves right? As in the Regressives are the Progressives.

 

It hardly matters if they were more balanced in regards to Trump, they're still terribly unbalanced and biased compared to credible, truthful media and we should accept nothing less than that.

 

Considering a lot of said truthful media was far worse than Fox on that matter... they are hardly very credible these days. I mean you can say no-one believes Fox and think they're liars but... thats peoples opinions on all of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

a7da39a57aeade787d881f2c1cd71d75.png

 

So, maybe some people to tend to view conservatives as regressive. My point still stands, nothing I wrote about progressivism implies that "they are the forward path and anyone who opposes them is against the future and will soon be in the dustbin of history". What these other people have written has nothing to do with my own opinions, I fail to see the relevance. We're not talking about conservatives either, we're talking about the alt-right, which I assume isn't quite the same.

orwell_s_1984_oceania_s_currency_by_dungsc127_d97k1zt-fullview.jpg.9994c8f495b96849443aa0defa8730be.jpg

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, maybe some people to tend to view conservatives as regressive. My point still stands, nothing I wrote about progressivism implies that "they are the forward path and anyone who opposes them is against the future and will soon be in the dustbin of history". What these other people have written has nothing to do with my own opinions, I fail to see the relevance. We're not talking about conservatives either, we're talking about the alt-right, which I assume isn't quite the same.

 

You were the one who started saying that MAGA was regressive and going backwards. I simply went into it and told you that what you were exposing was the myth of progressivism if you know it or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You were the one who started saying that MAGA was regressive and going backwards. I simply went into it and told you that what you were exposing was the myth of progressivism if you know it or not.

 

Well, progressivism means very little to me because progress is different to different people. So I suppose you are right that it's a myth of sorts.

orwell_s_1984_oceania_s_currency_by_dungsc127_d97k1zt-fullview.jpg.9994c8f495b96849443aa0defa8730be.jpg

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.