Thread: Where do you get your world news?

The Internet and Dr. Phil.

Newspaper, magazines (Usually during free time in school/work), and various internet sites.

Aljazeera in English. Gotta love such a controversial news station.

http://english.aljazeera.net/HomePage

Word of mouth (ie people telling me about it ), or catching the news on BBC 1 at some point. If there's something I want to know about I go to BBC.co.uk as well.

strategypage.com
Various sources in the military
Internet
iraqstatusreport.com
threatswatch.org

Those mainly. We don't quite have good tv so...

CNN.
Digg.com
The Daily Show with Jon Stewart (haha)

'Faux News' should be watched for entertainment (and infuriation) value only.

Fox News, MSNBC, CNN, NPR, Yahoo! News, talk radio, other.

Fox News' most popular commentators are conservative, but their straight news reporters are good at being neutral, usually. Also, even their commentators are constantly having liberal guests on their shows to give the other sides of the arguments. The network is still overall more conservative than liberal. I highly recommend that liberals watch it so they can at least know what the other side of the arguments are and to see what news stories the other sources are leaving out.

MSNBC, on the other hand, is all out liberal. They should call themselves the Anti-Fox News Network. Keith Olberman should call his show the Anti-O'Reilly Show since O'Reilly is clearly the most important person in Olberman's life. Their commentators most often never have guests who represent the other side (except Chris Matthews), and their straight news reporters are viciously left wing. Some of them even admit it. I watch them just to catch the places where Fox News was a bit too biased to show all of the truth. I find it hilarious when I watch actual video clips on Fox News that disprove the slants of MSNBC. I watch CNN for even more perspective, and the same is true of the other sources I listed. NPR is the most laughably biased of all of them, but I like knowing all of the angles. I don't think any of the straight news reporters of any of them flat out lie. That would destroy them. Capitalism has a way of creating competition that keeps people acting right when they are being watched by the public.

Originally Posted by Alextanium

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart (haha)

That douche is a million light years from understanding how the world works, but sadly, a lot of college age people actually do get their "news" and perspectives from him. That is so sad.

Through no real desire or intention of my own, I get my "news" by word of mouth mostly...

Because honestly, I believe and feel that no real "news" traveling on or trickling off from those mainstream outlets actually exists outside of one's first-hand experience of it so one should pay second or third party information no more mind than a dream they had last night...

So-called "news" act as shadows of masks to those with agendas riddled with lower emotion in order to siphon control and power and instill fear in the individual from the very inception of their intention of broadcasting said "news"...



"The gigantic catastrophes that threaten us today are not elemental happenings of a physical or biological order, but psychic events. To a quite terrifying degree we are threatened by wars and revolutions which are nothing other than psychic epidemics. At any moment several millions of human beings may be smitten with a new madness, and then we shall have another world war or devastating revolution. Instead of being at the mercy of wild beasts, earthquakes, landslides, and inundations, modern man is battered by the elemental forces of his own psyche." -Carl Jung

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

That douche is a million light years from understanding how the world works, but sadly, a lot of college age people actually do get their "news" and perspectives from him. That is so sad.

That was a joke. Lighten up.

Mostly 4chan.

Originally Posted by Seismosaur

The Internet and Dr. Phil.

I know you're joking about Dr. Phil, but any particular outlets, on the Internet, or just anything you come across?

Originally Posted by Kushna Mufeed

Aljazeera in English. Gotta love such a controversial news station.

http://english.aljazeera.net/HomePage

I've been thinking of looking into Al Jazeera, just to see what kind of shit they're talking about. Thanks for the link.

Originally Posted by Alextanium

CNN.
Digg.com
The Daily Show with Jon Stewart (haha)

'Faux News' should be watched for entertainment (and infuriation) value only.

Haha. Jon Stewart is awesome (as a comedian, of course - not a news source).

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Fox News, MSNBC, CNN, NPR, Yahoo! News, talk radio, other.

Fox News' most popular commentators are conservative, but their straight news reporters are good at being neutral, usually. Also, even their commentators are constantly having liberal guests on their shows to give the other sides of the arguments. The network is still overall more conservative than liberal. I highly recommend that liberals watch it so they can at least know what the other side of the arguments are and to see what news stories the other sources are leaving out.

MSNBC, on the other hand, is all out liberal. They should call themselves the Anti-Fox News Network. Keith Olberman should call his show the Anti-O'Reilly Show since O'Reilly is clearly the most important person in Olberman's life. Their commentators most often never have guests who represent the other side (except Chris Matthews), and their straight news reporters are viciously left wing. Some of them even admit it. I watch them just to catch the places where Fox News was a bit too biased to show all of the truth. I find it hilarious when I watch actual video clips on Fox News that disprove the slants of MSNBC. I watch CNN for even more perspective, and the same is true of the other sources I listed. NPR is the most laughably biased of all of them, but I like knowing all of the angles. I don't think any of the straight news reporters of any of them flat out lie. That would destroy them. Capitalism has a way of creating competition that keeps people acting right when they are being watched by the public.

You and I will probably always disagree on FOX News. I think it's the most one-sided network out there, if not the polar opposite of MSNBC. All of their democratic guests seem to be the most unqualified, weakly-spoken, most often irrational punching bags they can find. Whenever I watch them, I'm always shaking my head at how weakly they make their points, and are dog-piled on by the republican speakers that usually out-number them. With the regular newscasts, it's not so much the anchors that are conservative, it's the stories they decide to run, and the lengths at which they run them.

Just my opinion, of course.

I think CNN is the most neutral (out of FOX, MSNBC and CNN at least). I like how they have very competent speakers from both sides - like democratic and republican strategists, instead of just columnists and such - and everyone (even the anchors at times) are equally critical of both sides of the spectrum.

What's NPR?

Originally Posted by SolSkye

Because honestly, I believe and feel that no real "news" traveling on or trickling off from those mainstream outlets actually exists outside of one's first-hand experience of it so one should pay second or third party information no more mind than a dream they had last night...

I'm not sure what you mean by that. Do you mean to say that you don't believe that the "news" doesn't really happen? News like the typhoon in Myanmar and the earthquake in China, etc?

Oh, and as for mine, I usually watch CNN or read CNN.com and Reuters, but I like to switch up and watch/read FOX and MSNBC for perspective.

Coast to Coast AM With george noory and Art Bell

http://icanhascheezburger.com/

http://www.facebook.com/

* kidding * - CNN more than anything

Good topic O, I'm curious to know how people get their info.

The Onion.

I gave up on watching the news. It is irrelevant and agenda based for the most part.

I don't know why you guys watch the news either. If something important enough that it will affect your life, you will find out about anyway.

As for presidential candidates, there should just be a website that lists all their views and sides on topics. Thats how it was done in the old days, minus the internet thing. You shouldn't let them poision you with their fake tears and unearthly charisma.

Presidential candidates are the greatest actors in the world. Take away their public appearance ACT and they will be forced to use their beliefs to get elected over their ACTING. They rely on the public appearance and popularity too much. In my opinion they shouldn't be allowed to have speeches.

Originally Posted by Alextanium

That was a joke. Lighten up.

I know you were joking, but you gave me something to talk about. You brought up Jon Stewart, and I said what I think of him and how he affects too many college age people. Beyond the fact that you gave me something to talk about, my comment had nothing to do with you. Lighten up.

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

I think CNN is the most neutral (out of FOX, MSNBC and CNN at least). I like how they have very competent speakers from both sides - like democratic and republican strategists, instead of just columnists and such - and everyone (even the anchors at times) are equally critical of both sides of the spectrum.

Yeah, CNN is the most neutral of the three. I still think they have a liberal slant that shows itself more at certain times than others, but MSNBC makes them look like the Southern Baptist Convention.

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

What's NPR?

National Public Radio. It is the governnment's radio network, and interestingly, they are extremely liberal. They play the show All Things Considered in the afternoons. NPR usually has local networks play stuff during the day. Here, we have the local affiliate PRM (Public Radio Mississippi), and they play classical music most of the time but play blue grass and blues on Saturday nights. Your local station probably plays that stuff too.

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

I'm not sure what you mean by that. Do you mean to say that you don't believe that the "news" doesn't really happen? News like the typhoon in Myanmar and the earthquake in China, etc?

What I mean is, if so-called "news" was really meant for you, you would've already known and experienced it first hand without having to "inform" yourself about it.

Anything negative known through second or third party sources is about as useful as rubbernecking as you pass an accident on the highway-- it does no one justice and is more a subconscious way of basking in the glow from your perspective and feeling better for not having to experience the same thing, whether one is consciously aware of that or not.

In all honesty, even if you contributed some money to a charity or something that benefited those affected by the typhoon or earthquake, what did the knowledge of those events actually do for you as a person, other than provide you with some water cooler talk at work?

What did people around the world do to get their news before the internet, newspapers, mass media, etc? In those times, people were arguably no more worse for the wear from not having known about it. In all reality, they probably spent their time doing something more productive, instead.

I would argue, this perverse need of ours in this digital age to keep ourselves informed of the ills of the world is something that holds us back and bring us down as individuals.

As David Icke said in the video I posted, "The whole of this manipulated society is globally structured to make us fear, to make us have stress, to make us worry about tomorrow, have guilt about yesterday, and forget about now... it brings us into a slow dense vibrational state."

Originally Posted by Half/Dreaming

...If something important enough that it will affect your life, you will find out about anyway....

Are you a complete moron or something? That is one of the most ignorant things I have ever heard. For fucks sake.

Originally Posted by kichu

Are you a complete moron or something? That is one of the most ignorant things I have ever heard. For fucks sake.

I agree. It is the most fatal human flaw to wait until it directly affects you.

By the way I get most of my news off CNN.

NPR is my favorite, though I usually only listen in my car. Other than that it's usually CNN. Defiantly not great quality news coverage, but it's better than nothing. I watch FOX news once in a while for laughs.

Originally Posted by kichu

Are you a complete moron or something? That is one of the most ignorant things I have ever heard. For fucks sake.

Yes, I am a moron. Afterall I am a soldier.

Anyway, how much does the news affect your little life?

Originally Posted by kichu

Are you a complete moron or something? That is one of the most ignorant things I have ever heard. For fucks sake.

Whoa there.

I never thought I'd say this but, for once, I actually agree with Half/dreaming on that...

I haven't watched TV, or actively searched out any "news", in over 4 years without having a problem. The stories that happen to pass through the filter I put up, are obviously major enough to sneak through... like the earthquake in China, etc...

Arguably, one actively choosing to keep informed with the endless barrage of ills of the world on a daily basis, would be more of a morbid fascination than anything else. I would say it's a form of escapism from their own lot in life, and most times is wrought from wading in pools of their own stagnation and unproductivity... But, because it's considered "news" by the mainstream they feel themselves able to write it off as something informative...

Could someone tell me what informing yourself with said "news" from mainstream outlets has ever done for bettering you as individuals or a society?

(Please note, that by informing yourselves, I'm not talking about positive news stories like interesting technological advancements, scientific discoveries, or the other positive stories that personally interest you, but rather the unending negative ones that dominate our news and push us into a fear oriented mindsets.)

There are thousands of reasons to stay informed about what's happening in the world. I prefer to know when my civil liberties are being infringed so I can take action against it. I prefer to know about a recent disaster so I can do my part to send aid.

I guess it's about, what one does after getting informed...

Has the simple knowledge of any "news" brought about any real changes into your life other than just knowing and whining about an infraction of ones civil liberties?

If it motivates one to better themselves and others that's one thing... if it just causes them to know for the sake of knowing... thats another...