Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think is up to personal choices: • Quit subscribing corporate media and subscribe to single reporters that are doing real reporting. • Have zero tolerance for news that mislead you. ”Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.” • Try to find reporters that are willing to give you the honest cotext even if it goes against what you expect and does not affirm your believes. If enough people do this, those…
But single reporters seem even more aggressively partisan than corporate. They're often at least fairly explicit about this though - billing themselves as a journalist of the left or of the right or whatever spectrum you want - but there's still no balance.
Are we talking just providing an equal number of sentences from the perspective of each major party? How do we decide which parties get included, here? Do we instead break it up by major ideologies? Again, which ones?
Even if we attempt to go no ideology and just raw facts, the facts you choose to report are a result of interpretation. You could easily construct an entirely factual article that contains no subjective opinions and still be majorly and intentionally deceptive. So not mentioning any perspectives is also not balanced.
What balance is everybody talking about? How is it defined? How we determine what is and is not balanced?