posted on Apr, 7 2017 @ 03:03 PM
a reply to: SolAquarius
It's a load of BS, isn't it? Non-partisan sites are like needles in haystacks and who knows if the needle exists in the first place? This is the
reality of politics...it's all subjective and debatable.
If I want some tech news, slashdot
and The Register
is where I go. The
slashdotters tend to bring a little focus, but partisan BS has even infiltrated there.
Political neutrality is problematic. For example, BBC
is a site I've rated for many years and it's really dumbed
itself down in the past year. There's always been a slant towards left of centre without being a soap box for any sides. Still, the radio news shows
are great even though the website is going tabloid.
hosts some fantastic articles by international field journalists. Otherwise, I read The
Telegraph, Guardian and Independent because they span right to left in an intelligent way.
If it's a Middle East topic, reading Al Jazeera's
take and then comparing it to, say, BBC and Reuters works OK.
At least, it's a method of getting a broader perspective.
US politics is a whole other thing. A bit of Brietbart here, some Politico there and then some gambles on NYT, WaPo etc.
Most people aren't aware how editorial decisions are taken for business reasons. Owners tend to favour the political parties that offer the best
markets. In that way, it's less about politics and more about profits and market shares. A good example of this is Mr Murdoch. He's used his media
assets to steer his readership towards voting for whoever suits his business model.