The Most 'Distrusted' News Sources In America

THINK PROGRESS is THE MOST trusted news source?
...RIGHT.
I especially liked the article on how POT led to Michael BROWN'S death.

What's not surprising is that the right wingers will pretty much just put their trust into news organizations that tell them not to listen to any other news organizations.

IN the way that churches tell their congregations not to question things that don't make sense, because then you'll be admitting that your faith is not total, right wing news organizations use the same techniques on pretty much the same people that fall for religious claptrap at church.

Don't listen to other news organizations, anything they tell you isn't true, etc etc etc. Right wingers who only listen to Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity telling them that everything they hear on other networks is untrue, will blindly accept anything that right wing programs tell them as the truth, unquestioningly. When you challenge them that the right wing media is lying to them, they will tell you "oh, they would never lie". JUST LIKE CHRISTIANS say about their pastor and church.

In the same way, right wing organizations use names like "Patriots for America" to detract from the fact that they are about as far from a patriotic group as you could possibly imagine.

a reply to: babybunnies

Just for the record?

It's "Baby Jesus Patriots For America."

(and you have to wave a flag and salute when you say that)

a reply to: babybunnies

The fact that you seem to believe liberals don't do the same thing, is laughable.

ALL mass media is mostly propaganda because it's legal now.
ALL you can do is cross correlated and put it together THAT way.

I make light, but I actually get a more accurate read on ATS.

Because we get the distilled versions of media "stories" from all sources.

(This post was brought to you by Jesus American Patriots for Freedom against Communism)

(Amen)

a reply to: SLAYER69

"The authorities believe there are possibly more than one gunmen and may be as many as 3"

A person hears that then immediately TWEETS

"The NEWS is saying there are more than 3 gunmen"

Exactly what I thought. The footage of inside the Parliament building made me think, They hear a shot and its a gunman, someone hears a shot and an echo and its two gunman. The police fire back and now its three gunman…

Here we go, the city on lock down, everyone stay indoors, cavity search every pigeon for explosives…

a reply to: beezzer

excuse me for not wanting to dig through several thousand posts for evidence but i do appreciate how your stance has changed on this issue (or i would if i didnt know this is just more short sighted self preservation kicking in)

a reply to: intrptr

Exactly what I thought. The footage of inside the Parliament building made me think, They hear a shot and its a gunman, someone hears a shot and an echo and its two gunman. The police fire back and now its three gunman…

It can be difficult to tell the source of a shot when there are buildings around, like on the Maidan....

AS 79% of statistics are made up on the the spot, I would not trust any main news channel, or the people who do the surveys, the survey questions are slanted so the people doing the survey have to answer the way the survey firm wants them to, half the surveys I do, (the paying ones) I give up on.

originally posted by: ProfessorChaos

originally posted by: ladyinwaiting

originally posted by: ProfessorChaos

originally posted by: ladyinwaiting
a reply to: 727Sky

So Rush Limbaugh is supposed to be a "news source"? That's the most shocking thing here. I thought he was some sort of male Ann Coulter, who hates anything that moves that isn't him.

Seriously, I had no idea he is supposed to be a "news source". That's hilarious!

Am I to assume that you have no issue with ' The Colbert Report', or 'The Daily Show' being listed as news sources, since you mentioned Limbaugh, and not them?

Correct. They are comedy news shows. Tongue-in-cheek.

Tongue-in-cheek, or not, those shows ARE used as actual news sources by many of the more uninformed, which is why I found it interesting that you took issue with Limbaugh being labeled as a 'news source', and not with those two shows being labeled likewise.

Instead of dancing around the list and the issue, what we have are differing values and opinions, from you and I, list be damned.
You value Rush whatshisface, while I think he's full of hatred and deliberately misinformed propagandized crap. How's that for honesty? I admire the other two, who I find astute and intelligent, while you do not. If you think I'm "uninformed" then think again. There are rivers, and oceans between what we value. That's our issue. Not this list.

I began my posts on this thread with the observation that Rush Limbaugh was on a list of places where people get their news. I'm still shocked. He is one long running commentary on "the world according to Rush". Has little or nothing to do with actual 'news'.
So, yeah. Still shocked.


As for those other clowns, it's comedic, it's tongue-in-cheek, but they still report events of the day. News.

originally posted by: transola
I didn't realize rush limbaugh was considered a news source. Pretty sure it is an opinionated show, not a news source...

Either way, if you trust polls you are truly ignorant. Not saying that these news sources should be trusted, but seriously? C'mon...

If that's the standard then we haven't had news in the US since about 1967.

originally posted by: ladyinwaiting

originally posted by: ProfessorChaos

originally posted by: ladyinwaiting

originally posted by: ProfessorChaos

originally posted by: ladyinwaiting
a reply to: 727Sky

So Rush Limbaugh is supposed to be a "news source"? That's the most shocking thing here. I thought he was some sort of male Ann Coulter, who hates anything that moves that isn't him.

Seriously, I had no idea he is supposed to be a "news source". That's hilarious!

Am I to assume that you have no issue with ' The Colbert Report', or 'The Daily Show' being listed as news sources, since you mentioned Limbaugh, and not them?

Correct. They are comedy news shows. Tongue-in-cheek.

Tongue-in-cheek, or not, those shows ARE used as actual news sources by many of the more uninformed, which is why I found it interesting that you took issue with Limbaugh being labeled as a 'news source', and not with those two shows being labeled likewise.

Instead of dancing around the list and the issue, what we have are differing values and opinions, from you and I, list be damned.
You value Rush whatshisface, while I think he's full of hatred and deliberately misinformed propagandized crap. How's that for honesty? I admire the other two, who I find astute and intelligent, while you do not. If you think I'm "uninformed" then think again. There are rivers, and oceans between what we value. That's our issue. Not this list.

I began my posts on this thread with the observation that Rush Limbaugh was on a list of places where people get their news. I'm still shocked. He is one long running commentary on "the world according to Rush". Has little or nothing to do with actual 'news'.
So, yeah. Still shocked.


As for those other clowns, it's comedic, it's tongue-in-cheek, but they still report events of the day. News.

Anyone you see on the news today is a reader of editorial written by someone else, and in many cases with news supplied by someone else. Who supplies FOX, NBC, CBS, ABC, or MSNBC with news on ISIS? Mostly the government there is some trustworthy information. Who supplies the news with military operations? Of course the military. Gun footage, bomb footage? The news and I mean all of them are willing accomplices in distribution of propaganda.

ATS is almost always two days in front of any news station and usually more accurate. There are real members on the ground in most countries that have first hand experience in what's going on, take all of it into account and make your own decisions. The hotties and so called journalist all read a script written by someone else.

I put more trust in a news source that tends to be critical of the current administration rather than the cookie cutter sources like MSNBC, CNN & NBC that are little more than cheer leaders for the president, his policies and his administration.

When the political tide turns and Republicans seize power again I will probably pay more attention to these rather than Fox. I don't even have cable though, so I get most of my news from a variety of internet sources and just assume that most of them are biased one way or another.