What sources of information are objectively credible?

[Padawanbater2]

I'm sick of people posting bullshit from sites that clearly have a political bias. It's time we come up with a list of sources of information that we all can agree - or better yet, prove with evidence - are objectively credible.

So here's how it works, nominate a source of information (website, documentary, book, etc.) you believe is credible, provide evidence, then we vote "Credible Source of Information/Not a Credible source of Information". Since popularity of content doesn't necessarily mean the source of information is in fact credible, it's not a scientific poll, but we'll have a list of sources we can identify as "Mostly Liberal Slant", "Mostly Objective/Center Slant", "Mostly Conservative Slant", and anything in between. So next time someone posts something from a site on the list, we will have an already qualified (according to members) position on how credible it is and how much weight it holds.

So let's get the obvious ones out of the way..

1. I nominate MSNBC and I rate it as having a "Far Left, Mostly Liberal Slant"
2. I nominate CNN and I rate it as having a "Center-Right Slant"
3. I nominate Fox News and I rate it as having a "Far Right, Mostly Conservative Slant"

 

[Padawanbater2]

None of those sources of information are credible

 

[ChesusRice]

I'm sick of people posting bullshit from sites that clearly have a political bias. It's time we come up with a list of sources of information that we all can agree - or better yet, prove with evidence - are objectively credible.

So here's how it works, nominate a source of information (website, documentary, book, etc.) you believe is credible, provide evidence, then we vote "Credible Source of Information/Not a Credible source of Information". Since popularity of content doesn't necessarily mean the source of information is in fact credible, it's not a scientific poll, but we'll have a list of sources we can identify as "Mostly Liberal Slant", "Mostly Objective/Center Slant", "Mostly Conservative Slant", and anything in between. So next time someone posts something from a site on the list, we will have an already qualified (according to members) position on how credible it is and how much weight it holds.

So let's get the obvious ones out of the way..

1. I nominate MSNBC and I rate it as having a "Far Left, Mostly Liberal Slant"
2. I nominate CNN and I rate it as having a "Center-Right Slant"
3. I nominate Fox News and I rate it as having a "Far Right, Mostly Conservative Slant"

The best you can do is Reuters, Fox business, Al Jazeera and BBC for single source news

 

[Padawanbater2]

The best you can do is Reuters, Fox business, Al Jazeera and BBC for single source news

ChesusRice nominates:

1. Reuters
2. Fox Business
3. Al Jazeera
4. BBC

My Votes

-Reuters - Credible Source of Information - Objective
-Fox Business - Not Credible - Far Right, Mostly Conservative Slant
-Al Jazeera - Partly Credible - Liberal Slant
-BBC - Credible Source of Information - Objective

 

[ChesusRice]

ChesusRice nominates:

1. Reuters
2. Fox Business
3. Al Jazeera
4. BBC

My Votes

-Reuters - Credible Source of Information - Objective
-Fox Business - Not a Credible - Far Right, Mostly Conservative Slant
-Al Jazeera - Partly Credible - Liberal Slant
-BBC - Credible Source of Information - Objective

Fox Business reports news investors want to know. They don't slant their reporting unless it is an opinion piece.
Money doesn't care about politics, religion or skin color.
You will see many times Fox Business contradicts Faux news reporting.

 

[Padawanbater2]

Fox Business reports news investors want to know. They don't slant their reporting unless it is an opinion piece.
Money doesn't care about politics, religion or skin color.
You will see many times Fox Business contradicts Faux news reporting.

Got a report to confirm this?

 

[MuyLocoNC]

Got a report to confirm this?

A report from whom? A source that hasn't been voted on yet?

It seems like this thread went off the rails before it left the station.

 

[Padawanbater2]

A report from whom? A source that hasn't been voted on yet?

It seems like this thread went off the rails before it left the station.

A report from Fox Business that I can cross verify

 

[ttystikk]

I'll nominate Time, Newsweek, National Geographic, Discover, Scientific American, Popular Science/Mechanics.

Time; mostly credible, slight conservative slant
Newsweek; mostly credible, slight conservative slant
National Geographic; credible, objective
Scientific American; credible, objective
Pop Sci/Mech; mostly credible, slightly conservative

 

[Harrekin]

Lol, Newsweek.

The opinion piece rag of a magazine?

 

[MuyLocoNC]

I'll nominate Time, Newsweek, National Geographic, Discover, Scientific American, Popular Science/Mechanics.

Time; mostly credible, slight conservative slant
Newsweek; mostly credible, slight conservative slant
National Geographic; credible, objective
Scientific American; credible, objective
Pop Sci/Mech; mostly credible, slightly conservative

Time; zero credibility, massive liberal slant
Newsweek; zero credibility, massive liberal slant
National Geographic; mostly credible, slight liberal slant
Scientific American; mostly credible, slight liberal slant
Pop Sci/Mech; mostly credible, fairly objective
Reuters; credible, objective
Fox Business; mostly credible, slight Conservative slant
Al Jazeera; zero credibility, massive liberal slant
BBC, mostly credible, liberal slant
Fox News; mostly credible, massive Conservative slant
MSNBC; zero credibility, massive liberal slant

 

[ttystikk]

Time; zero credibility, massive liberal slant
Newsweek; zero credibility, massive liberal slant
National Geographic; mostly credible, slight liberal slant
Scientific American; mostly credible, slight liberal slant
Pop Sci/Mech; mostly credible, fairly objective
Reuters; credible, objective
Fox Business; mostly credible, slight Conservative slant
Al Jazeera; zero credibility, massive liberal slant
BBC, mostly credible, liberal slant

LOL @ Scientific American; 'mostly credible, slight liberal slant'

Gotta hate them liberal facts, now... don't let THOSE get in the way of a good argument!

 

[MuyLocoNC]

LOL @ Scientific American; 'mostly credible, slight liberal slant'

Gotta hate them liberal facts, now... don't let THOSE get in the way of a good argument!

LOL @ thinking because they have Scientific in their name, they can't have a liberal slant on some subjects.

I won't even go into your rating Time and Newsweek, two complete liberal rags, as having ANY Conservative slant. You might as well claim the NY Times has a Conservative slant.

You're not perceived as very bright, I wouldn't go commenting on other people's votes and remove all doubt.

 

[ttystikk]

LOL @ thinking because they have Scientific in their name, they can't have a liberal slant on some subjects.

I won't even go into your rating Time and Newsweek, two complete liberal rags, as having ANY Conservative slant. You might as well claim the NY Times has a Conservative slant.

You're not perceived as very bright, I wouldn't go commenting on other people's votes and remove all doubt.

Perceptions can be deceiving, you're a case study.

You see, 'objective' isn't defined by your 'values', it's what can actually be proven correct.

I can definitely see how right wingers would get confused.

 

[MuyLocoNC]

Perceptions can be deceiving, you're a case study.

You see, 'objective' isn't defined by your 'values', it's what can actually be proven correct.

I can definitely see how right wingers would get confused.

Really, so we're voting based on "proven" objectivity, not our own perception? What yet to be voted on sources will be used as evidence. Me thinks you resemble a dog chasing its tail. I'd love to see the evidence that Time and Newsweek have a Conservative slant over the thousands and thousands of articles that they offer.

I can definitely see how you are confused.

You'll notice the Op called for evidence to be provided for nominated sources and then proceeded to nominate three sources without evidence. This thread started and ended as a circle jerk.

 

[Padawanbater2]

Really, so we're voting based on "proven" objectivity, not our own perception? What yet to be voted on sources will be used as evidence. Me thinks you resemble a dog chasing its tail. I'd love to see the evidence that Time and Newsweek have a Conservative slant over the thousands and thousands of articles that they offer.

I can definitely see how you are confused.

You'll notice the Op called for evidence to be provided for nominated sources and then proceeded to nominate three sources without evidence. This thread started and ended as a circle jerk.

"- or better yet, prove with evidence -"

"Since popularity of content doesn't necessarily mean the source of information is in fact credible, it's not a scientific poll, but we'll have a list of sources we can identify as "Mostly Liberal Slant", "Mostly Objective/Center Slant", "Mostly Conservative Slant", and anything in between."

 

[meristem]

There is no such thing as objectivity in today's media. Really, there's no such thing as complete objectivity in journalism, period. How much biased opinion gets injected into media news coverage, whether intentional or not, is a matter of degrees.

The US media is pretty much either a butt boy for the Left, or a butt boy for the Right. They're little more than propaganda wings of either the Republicans (Fox News, Talk Radio, couple newspapers, etc.) or the Democrats (nearly everything other than Fox News,and Talk Radio).

Of course, we can always turn to rags like this - but in lots of ways it's really not too different.

 

[ChesusRice]

Got a report to confirm this?

Look up for Fox business report on illegal immigrant costs.
WSJ another Murdoch paper ran on the front page an opinion piece. About the need for fun control.
WSJ has not run a full page opinion piece in its first page since 1920

 

[MuyLocoNC]

"- or better yet, prove with evidence -"

"Since popularity of content doesn't necessarily mean the source of information is in fact credible, it's not a scientific poll, but we'll have a list of sources we can identify as "Mostly Liberal Slant", "Mostly Objective/Center Slant", "Mostly Conservative Slant", and anything in between."

You forgot this portion where you specifically outlined the process.

"So here's how it works, nominate a source of information (website, documentary, book, etc.) you believe is credible, provide evidence, then we vote "Credible Source of Information/Not a Credible source of Information"."

It's odd you left that out of your rebuttal.

 

[Padawanbater2]

You forgot this portion where you specifically outlined the process.

"So here's how it works, nominate a source of information (website, documentary, book, etc.) you believe is credible, provide evidence, then we vote "Credible Source of Information/Not a Credible source of Information"."

It's odd you left that out of your rebuttal.

I'm pretty sure I knew what I meant when I came up with the rules

I said nominate a source, and provide evidence for it if you have it - it would be better if you had it, but it's not required as it's not a scientific poll