07-06-2003 23:18									#31
	Increase the size of your Attachments

The problem with that is that every source will NOT report everything.

The most important things is commn sense. before you post something, think about it and try to accertain yourself if it is true. I trust the common sense of most people here. And if someone does post somehting false, eventually a countersource will come and show the mistake.

	07-06-2003 23:20									#32
	Put an end to popups!

GePap: take Indymedia for example of unreliable "reporting".

	08-06-2003 00:35									#33
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Shi Huangdi indymedia salon democratic action 90% of the stuff Che links too and expects us to believe as credible sources.

	08-06-2003 07:44									#34
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: indymedia salon democratic action 90% of the stuff Che links too and expects us to believe as credible sources.

---
The best thing is for us all to post from every goddamn source we can find--thus, eventually we will merge them all into a sort of reliable news. Or I think.
---

quote: . Personally I am ok with Fox News

Really? Remember when they declared that plant was a chem weapons lab before it even got checked out? Didn't it turn out to be a pesticides plant? Anyways, I can't change your news sources because I'm tired, other annoying litle bugs keep exclaiming for the computer, and experience shows me that people get stubborn quickly about this kind of thing. Signing off for now, see ya tomorrow!

	08-06-2003 08:03									#35
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Shi Huangdi A source should be avoided if it obviously has a political bias.

All sources have biases. These biases change over time, on various things, and sometimes more obvious than others

	08-06-2003 08:04									#36
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Azazel GePap: So, if I make a website named www.thetruenews.com, and I start publicizing things about pink unicorns on the other side of the moon, someone can freely quote me, and use me as a valid source?

Yeah? Do you have photos of them?

	08-06-2003 08:07									#37
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by Azazel GePap: take Indymedia for example of unreliable "reporting".

1. Can you porve to me its unreliability?
2. Does general unreliability ever actually disprove one specific story?

I can tell you straight out that you can never discount a specfic story from any source, even if 70% of the time before they have been wrong.

Only single stories can be challenged, not general sources.

	08-06-2003 08:27									#38
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Any Russian newsource "coming soon! Interview with Erich von Daniken....FROM THE SURFACE OF VENUS!"

People's Daily if it's about America or Chinese achievements....for Korean news and politics it can be more objective than the local government sychophant papers, though.

FOX news for obvious reasons.

AFN (American Forces Network) 'if you want us to do propaganda, at least give us a budget/my high school had a more professional TV network'

North Korean state news. 'All Dear Leader, All the Time'

the SABC: 'Nothing is wrong in South Africa. Please send more lightly-armed tourists with money.'

the Cato Institute.

Anything with the word 'Family' in it, or 'Values', or 'Tradtional'.

Chick Publications.

CNBC, BBC are my main newsources, CNN follows. The Economist is fairly reliable when they aren't grinding an ideological axe. ....I hate to admit it but I learn a lot about new software and related stuff by lurking and listening to the rants on Slashdot.

But for the earth-shaking stuff....the 9/11s, the dot-com meltdowns, the wars.....you've gotta go to Apolyton! Surely the mix of all extremist views will produce some sort of vaguely coherent picture.

	08-06-2003 15:15									#39
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

I find the Times to be less biased than a lot of other news sources. I guess that means they represent my views the best.

	08-06-2003 18:38									#40
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by Big Crunch I find the Times to be less biased than a lot of other news sources. I guess that means they represent my views the best.

I agree with the first, disgaree with the implication of the second.

	08-06-2003 19:58									#41
	Suffering from ads?

I like the Times too. Very surprising since some of it's political writers are ex-tory MPs, but it is still relatively unbaised IMHO.

In terms of credibility, I think all major newspapers and media channels can be quoted. WHen it coems to political stories, you can see biases in most, butn when it coems to factual reporting, very few are that unreliable (fox being the only one I can think of).

Bods: If the Guardian is considered unreliable because of it's bias then so is the Telegraph, which to me is more overtly political (although both are). I wouldn't call the Guardian Lib Dem either, since I support the Lib Dems, and I don't like the Guardian. The Guardian is a leftist paper economically, whereas the Lib Dems are pretty centre economically (though they are very liberal in social values). I don't think the BBC is biased either. You claim it's leftist yet it's flagship politics program (Newsnight) is headed by a staunch Tory (Jeremy Paxman).

There also seems to be more and more leftwards bias in channel 4 too, which is a shame. They have good reporting, but seem to be anti-capitalist whenever they get an opportunity.

	08-06-2003 20:03									#42
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by GePap As for the guardian, they retracted what they said about Wolfie online(and it never made it into print anyway).

It only took someone here a few minutes to confirm that the article was bollocks. How long do you think it would have taken a newspaper that actually cared about factual content? They jumped for the story because it confirmed thier only barely hidden political biases.

PS What does the fact that it never made it to print have to do with anything?

	08-06-2003 21:13									#43
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: They jumped for the story because it confirmed thier only barely hidden political biases.

So? Everyone here has a barely hidden, if hidden at all, political bias. So can news sources. The fallicy being preached here is that bias= not trustworthy. That may, or may not be true, specially for specific stories. If I linked a report about a cricket game from the Guardian, would you call it biased, because it is from the guardian?

As for the print comment: the net is ripe for this sort of shennanigens, since you can rather easily and without cost post somehting online. That it did not reach print means that before they dcided to print it , someone checked up, and found the mistake. If the Gurdian was so disreputable, why got rhoguh all that? Why not must print the story the next day anyway?

	08-06-2003 23:01									#44
	Tired of ads?

Drogue,

quote: I like the Times too. Very surprising since some of it's political writers are ex-tory MPs, but it is still relatively unbaised IMHO.

Not true. Whilst some of their comment writers are former Tories (ie, Matthew Parris) the feature writers and reporters are Blairite to the core.

	08-06-2003 23:24									#45
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by Cruddy Any of you guys ever read "The Final Call"? I think that's what it's called. The Nation Of Islam is a truly terrible reporter of news. Even Tass was less biased.

Are you referring to ITAR-TASS?

	08-06-2003 23:54									#46
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

On indymedia:

quote: Originally posted by GePap 1. Can you porve to me its unreliability?

Wasn't indymedia the one that "broke" the story that that CNN "faked" footage of Palestinians dancing?

Indymedia Article

quote: I can tell you straight out that you can never discount a specfic story from any source, even if 70% of the time before they have been wrong. Only single stories can be challenged, not general sources.

Absolutely, general sources can be challenged. If a news media has a track record of relying on unreliable sources, consistently poor fact checking, using misleading quotations and headlines and in general not having any journalistic ethics - and instead having tabloid ethics, then it is irresponsible and isn't worthy of ones time to read or consider true (or debating whether Madonna is really having the love child of aliens from neptune).

Cry wolf one too many times and yes people should ignore you. To do otherwise is just spinsanity.

	09-06-2003 00:31									#47
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

I find FOX news just same as would be CNN or CNBC. You should get your news from many sources, not limited yourself to one. I like to watch all three of the cable news chanels and listen to the radio when driving to work.

	09-06-2003 05:14									#48
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

indymedia had for a long time hosted a story about secret underground concentration and death camps in Israel, which could send up to 4000 palestinians to their death each day.

It was online for a year and so, and as of recently the link doesn't work:

http://arizona.indymedia.org/front....8&group=webcast

(i'm not SURE it's the correct link. try it)

	09-06-2003 08:38									#49
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by Edan On indymedia: Cry wolf one too many times and yes people should ignore you. To do otherwise is just spinsanity.

Abd yet, do we forget the end result of "crying wolf"? At one point they are right. Again, challange the story: to simply go on some thread and write:"thisd source is bad.." is little better than Spam. If you really s don;t think it true, stay out of the thread.

	09-06-2003 08:42									#50
	Support Apolyton

Well, then I'd put it about on par with the other news for reliability

Really, Indy does have a distinct bias but that's why I also use Apolyton, CNN (only occasionally) and CNBC for my major news sources. I had no idea they had articles about Isreali death camps or anything, but you're actually referring to a specific article instead of an actual..., er, thingie. I don't think there's near as much checking on an Indymedia story before it goes to publication than there is on a story on, say, CNBC or Apolyton. IIRC that's probably part of the "Independent" gist or they're just morons. Hopefully the first

	09-06-2003 08:52									#51
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by GePap Abd yet, do we forget the end result of "crying wolf"?

A broken clock might be right twice a day, that doesn't mean it makes for a good time piece. Under your philosophy, every article/story from every news story, be it CNN, Fox News, PBS, New York Times, The Guardian, Al Jazeera, The Daily Tabloid Trash, Indymedia, or the local grapevine (AKA, Auntie Mildred) all deserve equal wight, consideration and belief until and when you find something that directly contradicts that story.

That is utter nonesense.

	09-06-2003 08:58									#52
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: That is utter nonesense.

Only if you look at it from some self-righteous "defender of truth" way. this forum is about debate. A lot of debarte starts of with pieces people post. When all debate becomes bogged down in "that source is false" crap (and as I said, if you cant find a countersource, you casn never actually be assured of the correctness of your point) then debate dies. People need to excersice common sense and civility. if you don;t like a piece in a thread, think it false, well then MOVE ON. There are always other threads, or start a new one. But people are killing debate with this endless stupidity about sources.

	09-06-2003 09:07									#53
	Increase the size of your Attachments

People quoting the guardian are generally laughed at.

	09-06-2003 09:09									#54
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

any news that isn't put out by my newspaper is crap and unacceptable.

	09-06-2003 09:11									#55
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by Oerdin People quoting the guardian are generally laughed at.

Only by anti-guardian posters. Given that conservatives are less then 50% of posters, well, you are about 55% wrong there.

But you are loud, so that counts.

	09-06-2003 09:13									#56
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

I'd have to second (third) that indymedia is total rubbish which gives even tabloids like the National Inquirer a bad name. Just, total ideologically driven garbage.

	09-06-2003 10:33									#57
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Haha, when I say Fox News is unreliable...I'm more right than you are denying it

	09-06-2003 11:48									#58
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

The Way I Do It:

I read the Edmonton Sun (right-wing), and then cbc.ca (left-wing), and then take the middle road between what each of them tells me. I think it works fairly well.

For some reason, I just can't stand the Journal.

	09-06-2003 18:55									#59
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

hi ,

, al jaz

have a nice day

	09-06-2003 19:38									#60
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Like most here, I try to get my news from a variety of sources, but this morning, I finally gave up on Fox News

Their "news story," on Hillary's new book is centered on Fox New's assertion that the book is filled with lies. For example, Hillary "fails to admit" the Flower's affair. Fox News fails to remember that Flower's lawsuit was thrown out of court.

This was followed by a commentator stating how the Democratic Presidential candidates are saying there never were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. I may have missed something, but I've never heard any candidate say this. What they've been pointing out is that Bush said before the war that we knew WMD were there and that we knew where they were.

It's really sickening to see a major news channel constantly and intentionally distorting the Truth, and then calling other people liars because they don't agree with this distorted version.