I pay for news via tax and get usually high quality content from https://www.abc.net.au/
Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing
61–70 of 468 posts
Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing
#62I do, broadly, agree with the sentiment. I pay for The Economist, The Financial Times, and the Australian Financial Review. Plus I read BBC and Thompson Routers regularly. If there's something particularly contentious I'll have a look at what the Guardian is saying about it to try and get an alternative perspective. There's definitely a huge bias in almost all news sources. The Economist explicitly states their posit…
There's a really cool analysis/chart about the reliability of news sources here: http://www.adfontesmedia.com/the-chart-version-3-0-what-exac...
Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing
#63https://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/20/opinion/saddam-s-bombs-we...
> A version of this op-ed appears in print on June 20, 2003, on Page A00023 of the National edition
You know what an op-ed piece is, right? If you don't, here's a definition:
> An op-ed, short for "opposite the editorial page" or "opinion editorial", is a written prose piece typically published by a newspaper or magazine which expresses the opinion of an author usually not affiliated with the publication's editorial board.
Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do these alt-media companies have accredited journalists, held to objective professional and ethical standards laid out by journalist organizations? Do they cite credible sources and facts with every article? Because that's what we're losing. The idea that JoeBlowKnowsTheTruth.com holds the same level of accountability, rigor, and seriousness as an actual news organization is what's gotten us into this mess.
How did the other response to this comment get [dead] within _one minute_ of being posted?
[flagged]
Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think that’s called the Gell-Mann Effect [0]. I think these articles are pretty comical coming from the New York Times, a for profit company, that has been cutting costs amidst really serious editorial failures. I would believe this much more if it was from an independent news source. It’s like a car salesman telling you great buying a car is. It’s reasonable that the Times would have such a biased, unfounded artic…
In what way is NYT not an independent news source? It's not owned by some giant media conglomerate, it's family owned. And last I checked it was one of few media companies reporting good financial results, not cutting costs.
Good point. I meant that they are not independent from their owners’ profit motive. They are publicly traded [0] so their motive is not truth, it is maximizing shareholder equity under US law.
So arguments like this article, even cloaked under “opinion” don’t carry weight because it’s just propaganda to sell more papers.
Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
I dont consider BuzzFeed as quality either. Wishing a meme producing site wasnt sharing the name as whats supposed to be a news site. My other issue is when they dont properly check the source of a story like the MAGA teens whom they claimed were doing things they clearly were not if you saw the full video.... Fake News goes both ways... If the "mainstream" media wont check sources better then they are just as much a…
BuzzFeed News produces pretty good news reports. It's not the same as BuzzFeed proper.
Why BuzzFeed chose to use the same brand to cover such different sites is beyond me. Every time a quality article is linked here, almost without fail there is someone who will comment along the lines of "BuzzFeed is trash, I'm not clicking that"
I don't blame them. It's not their fault that the news site decided to share their name with a trash clickbait site.
Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing
#67There is no feature of paying for news that makes it more real. The NYT and WaPo should stop mixing news and editorial and relying on "anonymous administration officials" and intelligence agencies; that would set an example to other outlets.
Paying makes theml publisher less beholden to advertisers mean they need fewer fluff/shock pieces, which leaves more money and time for more serious journalism.
Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing
#68Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing
#69Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing
#70I want a service where I can subscribe to journalists not news papers. I want to know that they are getting a portion of my subscription and being successful. I want 0 advertising in this news paper. Where do I get it? Is this something we need to create? I'd love a fact check o meter on each journalist as well, but I think that'd be very open to bias, so I don't know how that'd happen. Anyway, I don't subscribe to n…
I tried building a version of this in 2015 called Uncoverage. Beacon did too. Not enough people cared enough to support individual journalists. real stories take too long to write, all journalists need editors, and the value prop feels unfamiliar and seems thin for subscribers. Some are trying now on Patreon.