It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Who do you ACTUALLY trust for news?

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Dec, 29 2016 @ 05:05 PM

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: KyoZero

Only local news, though according to the propaganda model, any source that is indebted to advertisers and special interests should be met with doubt.

Well, my local print media is owned by liberal elitist Alice Ragoff and contains more WaPo regurgitated garbage than it does locally sourced news. I trust the Alaska Dispatch less than I trust CNN... and I wouldn't give an ounce of ball sweat for CNN.

Frankly, I don't trust the media period.

posted on Dec, 29 2016 @ 06:05 PM
ATS is the only place I get my news. After someone has started a thread I read the links to determine of it bs or not and 90% of the time its not.

I stopped watching MSM years ago and actually only used to watch CNN lol, when I look back I realize how uninformed I was. I stopped all together when I joined here. Occasionally I will go through the main news channels just to see what bs they are making up, I usually can't watch for more than a minute.

I'm so glad I found this site, I would probably be a CNN zombie and voted for Hillary without it.

So thank you to all that start threads and keep us informed. And a special thanks to the staff that keep this site running and free!!!

edit on 12/29/2016 by 772STi because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 29 2016 @ 06:40 PM
I always check the context of major news events, usually can see a headline pattern in the list of google news search returns. There are other news search engines and sometimes the graphics linked in the stories explain more than the text.

For me the more important question is "how" do you trust not who.

posted on Dec, 29 2016 @ 07:06 PM
a reply to: KyoZero

Good thread.

I do not trust any News outlets or any alternatives websites either. If a current event is intrested to me, I will run a multi search about the said topic, and draw my conclusions from there.

I agree with what a poster said on here that any media accepting advertising is beholding to them to what content will be seen whether it is true or not.

I do not watch any mainstream media because the fact is, they are all spouting properganda. I do not watch any talking point News Shows either, because they are all properganda networks.

It's easy when you know the FCC controls the media and the fact is the CIA controls the FCC. Mainstream media News is run on a political platform to fit a current agenda, whatever that agenda is.

posted on Dec, 29 2016 @ 07:23 PM
a reply to: KyoZero

Trust none of it. Assimilate all the info from a variety of sources, mainstream and alternative...and find a common ground to decide what is real...or not to be believed as real.

posted on Dec, 29 2016 @ 07:54 PM
You bring up some interesting points, and one of the pet peeves I have with the way some people argue here. You can post pretty much anything, no matter how ridiculous it is, as long as you can cite a reference that someone else is willing to accept. Failure to cite a reference, even for things everyone knows to be true, means you are lying or gullible or regurgitating rhetoric, and so on. The problem is that a cited reference is just someone else's word. How many do you need before it becomes acceptable information? And lets not forget that if the source is questionable to someone then nothing they ever say can be taken as fact. Nothing. Which means there is no such thing as a reputable source anywhere for anything. If you cite something from the Daily Mail people will jump all over you then cite something from CNN to show how wrong you are. And completely miss the hypocrisy in the process. That little paradox is something people are willing to overlook as long as it is convenient and supports their position. People have two standards - an acceptable slant for their views and an unacceptable slant for the opposition.

I stopped getting "news" from news stations long ago. For the most part they don't report news any more, just opinions. I listen to the subject, then skip the opinions and look around for my own information. Though I have to confess, lately I have become a bit lazy. I listen to both the right and left sides and feel confident the truth is somewhere in between. I weigh the two sides and tend toward the one that sounds less ridiculous.

posted on Dec, 29 2016 @ 08:32 PM
I read everything, then fact check as best I can. There is no outlet in existence 100% free from bias. That said, the most objective I've found - while still not perfect, and in spite of what its name might imply to some - is CSMonitor.

The least objective in my experience and opinion are CNN, Breitbart, MSN, and Fox news. It's more that they have very strong slants/spin, than that they lie outright ... though there's some of that as well.

As a rule, I believe half of what I see and less of what I hear.


posted on Dec, 29 2016 @ 08:52 PM

--just keep an eye on it.

posted on Dec, 29 2016 @ 09:27 PM
i trust reddit before msm or even ats. reddit usually gets the news a few days before anyone even catches on.

posted on Dec, 29 2016 @ 09:40 PM
I'm surprised no one said this....

The Christian Science Monitor.

Probably one of the most balanced news organizations I can think of!

posted on Dec, 29 2016 @ 10:03 PM
I only trust the National Enquirer. In my opinion, if it's not fake, it's not real. I keep checking my front porch for Bat Boy. So far, no luck. But I know he's out there.

posted on Feb, 19 2017 @ 12:04 PM
I read different sources, but there is none which I can totaly trust.

posted on Feb, 25 2017 @ 09:00 PM
Fox News and ABC are okay. CNN is the worst IMO.

posted on Feb, 25 2017 @ 09:06 PM
a reply to: KyoZero

For local news, I watch the Chicago NBC/CBS/ABC affiliate.

I get political and world news from many sources..including Liberal and Conservative talk radio.

posted on Feb, 25 2017 @ 09:08 PM
I only trust


posted on Feb, 25 2017 @ 09:09 PM
@Who do you ACTUALLY trust for news?
ATS is good at times with providing early news before other news outlets. Otherwise CNN has been main site since September 2001...
Note attempts to flame a Hydra only burn the flamer

posted on Feb, 25 2017 @ 11:08 PM
At this point I'd say some of the better posts on ATS, Voat, youtube truthers. Trustworthy sources are pretty tough at this point.

posted on Feb, 25 2017 @ 11:12 PM
The Real Donald Trumps tweets are the only thing worth looking at anymore....

posted on Feb, 27 2017 @ 08:16 AM
a reply to: carewemust

I like that the political info you get is two-sided. I imagine that allows you to really here all the relevant info and BS from each side and make your own path.

posted on Feb, 27 2017 @ 08:20 AM
I trust MYSELF.

I don't READ ANYTHING and believe it 100%, everything I read is fiction till otherwise proven FACT.

If you don't do the same you're the very definition of gullible.

News was never to be taken as 100% fact, that would make it too easy of a propaganda station, instead we are to research and question to arrive at factual evidence otherwise is heresay.

new topics

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in