What sources of information are objectively credible?

MuyLocoNC

MuyLocoNC

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
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
Click to expand...
Mmm, okay. Then that clearly shows that ttystikk is confused. Since evidence or "proof" isn't required, votes on objectivity will obviously be made based on member's perceptions and "values". Thanks for the clarification. It's a popularity contest and voting will fall along party lines, as I knew it would.
 
NLXSK1

NLXSK1

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
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"
Click to expand...
There are no sources of information that are objectively credible. The only thing that is objectively credible is accurate data. What people make of that afterwards is simply conjecture.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
meristem said:
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.

Click to expand...
There's a slant to everything. The key isn't to simply discredit the source out of hand, but to drill down past the opinion to the facts- which ARE objective.

My problem with Faux Spews is that those drilling expeditions keep coming up dry, and that's why I don't find them credible.
 
Last edited:
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Moldy said:
Comedy Central - Left wing comedy slightly funny at times, more funny at other times.
Click to expand...
And surprisingly credible, considering the intent isn't too inform so much as entertain.

Could be a new model for Fox...
 
The_Herban_Legend

The_Herban_Legend

Well-Known Member
This is fucking hilarious! Not the the thread or its intended purpose but the comments on this thread have been hilarious. A good wake n bake read.
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
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
Click to expand...
-Time - NA
-Newsweek - NA
-National Geographic - Credible Source of Information - Objective
-Scientific American - Credible Source of Information - Objective
-Popular Science/Mechanics - NA
MuyLocoNC said:
Fox News; mostly credible, massive Conservative slant
MSNBC; zero credibility, massive liberal slant
Click to expand...
lol...
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
-The Daily Mail - Not a Credible Source of Information - Far Right, Mostly Conservative Slant
-The Daily Caller - Not a Credible Source of Information - Far Right, Mostly Conservative Slant
-Breitbart.com - Not a Credible Source of Information - Far Right, Mostly Conservative Slant
-The Daily Beast - Not a Credible Source of Information
-Forbes - Partially Credible Source of Information - Right Leaning, Mostly Conservative Slant
-Huffington Post - Not a Credible Source of Information - Far Left, Mostly Liberal Slant
 
Oregon Gardener

Oregon Gardener

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
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"
Click to expand...
Vice.
 
C

ChesusRice

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
-The Daily Mail - Not a Credible Source of Information - Far Right, Mostly Conservative Slant
-The Daily Caller - Not a Credible Source of Information - Far Right, Mostly Conservative Slant
-Breitbart.com - Not a Credible Source of Information - Far Right, Mostly Conservative Slant
-The Daily Beast - Not a Credible Source of Information
-Forbes - Partially Credible Source of Information - Right Leaning, Mostly Conservative Slant
-Huffington Post - Not a Credible Source of Information - Far Left, Mostly Liberal Slant
Click to expand...
Townhall
Forward progressives
Democratic underground
Anything associated with John Tanton
(Cis,Fair,English usa)
Anything associated with Glenn Beck

All of the above not credible
 
Oregon Gardener

Oregon Gardener

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
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"
Click to expand...
Rollitup Newsletter? :)
 
G

GrowUrOwnDank

Well-Known Member
@Padawanbater2

So you compile these sources of "credible" in your objective opinion, information. That has no slant. And you objectively consider this holy grail(in your own mind) information. What are you gonna do with it? Whine about it? Start another debate complaining about how silly it is? Debate it on the RIU?

Hey man. We all know how fucked up the world is and the people in it. That ain't news bro. This same shit been discussed, maybe since the beginning of time? At least since written history.

I dunno man. The world needs solutions: not more bitching, whining and complaining from those who "see" the wrong. It's an endless circle. YET! Listen to no one and everyone. Observe. Use your senses. Delve deep within and try to understand "WHY" the agenda is skewed. Let it be measured in wisdom. If you think you have a REAL solution and it is real. It will be complete. Make it happen. Share it then. The elisions of prosperity are real within us all. That's what we live for. It's all good. Even if you only live for identifying problems. Or recognizing a skewed reality and exist within it. Knowing you won't make change. Cause the delusions are way more powerful than real.

Meanwhile. We do this to exercise our brains and perhaps it gives us a little relief from our own frustrations of what atrocities we witness.

Respect bro. Just saying. Take it from a realist. Haven't given up. I still think about it. Maybe you should write a book.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top