To ask what politically neutral information sources you use?(28 Posts)
Already today, I've seen the spiel of politically ignorant, alright jack, thick, stupid etc insults. So AIBU to ask what resources there are where you can get non biased info and views from different parties? It just seems instead of just berating people if you think they're uninformed it's better to give people direction to more information with facts that isn't party propaganda
There are some that are worth reading, but I think they all have a party slant. I did some research a few months back when I, like you, was feeling frustrated with ridiculously far right/left sources being touted as credible! So, my go to newspapers in the UK are: The Times (centrist-right), The Guardian (centrist-left) and The Telegraph (left, if I remember correctly). I chose The Times as a subscription because I tend to lean left, but I don't want to live in my own echo chamber...I like to make sure I'm getting a balanced perspective. I have news apps on my phone, AP and Reuters, which seem pretty centre, but they are quite American focused.
Hope that helps!
Everything has a bias. You just need to know what it is and take it into account. Don't just read sources you agree with either, read sources you disagree with too, it's important not to lose sight of how the "other side" thinks and end up in a self reinforcing bubble.
I'm finding Simple Politics on Twitter useful for information on political procedure.
Otherwise I find that reading both left and right wing publications then disregarding 90% of what they all say to be the best way forward.
You could take this quiz: www.whoshouldyouvotefor.com
I imagine it will be updated soon to reflect the new election manifestos.
a couple of national newspapers, a couple of local rags, a couple foreign newspapers.
and clearing the cookies regularly.
I tend to rely on Radio 4 and listening to politicians actually talking in interviews, etc, for the "horse's mouth" aspect. I take what crops up on facebook with a large pinch of salt!
I don't think there are neutral news sites everything has a bias. You're probably best reading both the Times and Guardian (both centrist with opposite slants) and the truth will sit somewhere in the middle. It's always useful to read from sources with the opposite from your political view otherwise you end up getting a skewed view of the world. You might not agree with the opposite view but it's good to understand and think about the arguments both sides make.
Full Fact is good. I also like The Week, and whilst I don't kid myself it's neutral, it does at least present a selection of what different publications are reporting on the same issue.
I think it's important to read sources and opinion pieces from who don't necessarily share your political views. I am fairly right-wing, but I make a point of reading pieces in the Guardian and other 'lefty' places as well as traditionally right-wing papers and sources. It's an education, and I can see things from another perspective. I might not agree with the starting premise, or the writer's outlook on life, but unless I've taken the trouble to find out why someone thinks differently to me, I might just assume it's because they are ignorant. Which is a very narrow-minded way to look at those who disagree with you.
I find that often reading opinions from opposing writers can crystallise things for me and show up if arguments on a particular side are weak.
I imagine it's nearly impossible to find a comprehensive politically neutral source! There will always be some agenda on various issues, however balanced it might claim to be.
Basically, read the stuff you think you will disagree with, as it can be eye-opening. It's much more enlightening than deciding that all Tories are money-grubbing cruel privatisers of the NHS, or that the Left are pathetic snivelling snowflakes. Such dismissals are lazy and disrespectful.
A mixture of sources, some more neutral than others (the BBC is not too biased, although I know many people think it is), along with some more biased ones - mainly online papers (Independent, Telegraph, Guardian) which all have a bias, but can generally be relied on to report facts with a spin rather than outright lies, iyswim.
Then if I see an interesting claim on Mumsnet or facebook etc, I quickly check via google whether its complete bullshit or not. Some things will always be subjective, but otheres can be quickly proven disproven - eg, "x politician said y in an interview with z" - can quickly find transcript/ video of said interview to see if they really said it and in what context.
There is no perfect, unbiased, comprehensive source of information and never has been but we have the advantage nowadays of so much information at our fingertips that it is a shame to waste it.
I was taught at school that everything has a bias. Even history books are written from a particular perspective.
I read various sources and then make my own judgements. It is the only way in my humble opinion!!!
Do people really think the guardian is quite centre? I try to read and listen to the parties direct and draw my own conclusions. If research is mentioned I try to read the original research rather than a press slant on it. I have a look at newspapers from France and Germany too if possible to see what they are saying about it. I try and read several different papers and see the common ground.
Read a variety of sources. Times and telegraph are right of centre. Daily mail is too, but more full of click bait. Guardian and independent are left of centre.
Mirror is left. Express is right. But harder to get anything of real help from either.
Bbc tries to be central. It seems to mostly piss off everyone which seems better than pleasing everyone to me. But it definitely gets less anti-government around the time the charter is being renewed!
Who should I vote for is interesting but depends on governments keeping their manifesto pledges. Which they only do if it suits them.
The telegraph is very much right not left!
I am a lefty and read the guardian,independent and the telegraph for a look at the other side. The independent is the more neutral than the guardian, I prefer the guardian.
Reuters is one of the least biased sources of info out there.
Reuters adheres to its Trust principles and is committed to freedom from bias in every country they report in. Very much fact based journalism rather than opinion pieces. Main site is US focused bit you can select country options. Does a nice video news roundup too. Highly recommend.
Very international, but for well written, reliably scathing journalism, The Economist cannot be beaten.
I don't even live in the UK, but I find the BBC is extremely biased against Corbyn (about whom I have no opinion, for what it is worth).
Everyone has a bias so the best sources are the ones that are clear about their bias, IMHO. As the centre, what is that? The centre of what?
Agree with the Reuters suggestion. Avoid the BBC (left) & Sky (right)
I really recommend "Full fact" if you want to understand the truth about issues such as health, immigration, crime etc. They do not provide political commentary but provide an independent fact checking service. So if a politician states that x number of immigrants came to the Uk for example they will drill down into the official figures. It really hilights to me how politicians and media cherry pick the highlights or " alternative facts" from a set of statistics without fully comprehending or explaining the complexities of the information or alternatively the limitations of the research findings. It's well worth a look.
I'm off to investigate "full fact", thanks.
Other than that, I tend to assume each story, as presented, will have some kind of bias or spin. So, I'll try to read the same story on another news page, to at least recognise the spin.
I've worked in an industry which has had multiple stories written about it. In those stories, I can recognise the parts which are biased, have been spun and are outright lies, in amongst the unbiased truth, based on my experience. What annoys me is that I know that I will read stories about other industries / parts of life / political policies that I'm not an "expert" on, so will be less capable of easily identifying where the truth has been exaggerated or stretched. So the only way is to challenge my first interpretation is by reading a second version of the same event.
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now »
Already registered? Log in with:
Please login first.