3
3
0
There is certainly no shortage on places where you can turn to on the internet to get your news. From your local town news paper to national and international news agencies to independent news sources, everyone has a way to share what they feel is news. But with all this information just a mouse click away, I sometimes wonder what makes people decide to use one source over the other within RallyPoint? Is there truly a "fair and balanced" source out there? How much of the burden is placed on us, the general public to read more and come to our conclusions based on several sources? Do you find yourself only going to those sites that side with your point of view or are you continuously looking around to see what others have to say, even if it goes against your point of view?
Posted in these groups: 
RallyPoint
RallyPoint
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 8
2
2
0
Generally speaking, if it is more than one place, it is much more likely to be a reported fact. Single-source is much more likely to be reported opinion and skewed by that particular institution's bias.
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
What would make a good news source would be one that actually reported the facts of the news, not edited opinions about it.
It seems to me that the general perception is a good news source is one which portrays MY opinion. That is of course so wrong and is the reason for the continuing division in our country.
Nothing turns me off more than the statement " Oh, that is from --------- so it can't be true.
It seems to me that the general perception is a good news source is one which portrays MY opinion. That is of course so wrong and is the reason for the continuing division in our country.
Nothing turns me off more than the statement " Oh, that is from --------- so it can't be true.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
There is no such thing as "fair and balanced" anywhere. The best way to do this when researching is look at the source, then compare it to another who reported the same thing. While there's going to be quite a few differences, the meat and potatoes will be the same. If you cannot see past party lines and will only look at MSNBC (for ex), then you're missing part of something that Fox might have the answer for, or vice versa. Wikki is about the single worst site to use for real information.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
The classic questions answered, while avoiding editorializing.
Who, What, Where, When, Why, & How. Avoiding opinions unless explicitly stating they are opinions.
There will always be some bias. It's impossible to avoid, because the act of reporting itself is "bias" in some ways. However, interjecting personal views into the report itself should be avoided, or at a minimum caveated.
Sources that "tailor a narrative" or worse, sources that pander to their sponsors because a specific narrative is more lucrative are those that are stepping away from "good."
Who, What, Where, When, Why, & How. Avoiding opinions unless explicitly stating they are opinions.
There will always be some bias. It's impossible to avoid, because the act of reporting itself is "bias" in some ways. However, interjecting personal views into the report itself should be avoided, or at a minimum caveated.
Sources that "tailor a narrative" or worse, sources that pander to their sponsors because a specific narrative is more lucrative are those that are stepping away from "good."
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
SGT Ben Keen
I generally will search multiple sites before I form an opinion on something. My Google skills are second to none in that regard, LOL.
But generally, I've learned that if I see something on an independent news site that isn't being carried by the major players, it's probably fake.
I generally will search multiple sites before I form an opinion on something. My Google skills are second to none in that regard, LOL.
But generally, I've learned that if I see something on an independent news site that isn't being carried by the major players, it's probably fake.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
LCDR (Join to see)
Just like the song News is generated to attract viewers and as such they sensationalize their reporting. I like the idea of seeking multiple sources because, if your only source is "network" news you will not get the whole picture. Take for example Jade Helm, the local network news channels paraded every paranoid redneck on the prime time news talking about all of their guns and how they are going to protect themselves from Obama trying to invade Texas. These reports got more sensationalized as we got closer to the exercise. Now you don't hear a word about how the sensationalized the story and only incensed the public with nonsense. Truth is news reporter don't have to tell you the truth, any attempt to make them tell the truth would be met with violations of their constitutional right to free speech and freedom of the press.
(3)
(0)
LCDR (Join to see)
Ok I guess someone reported the end of the exercise
http://www.kvue.com/story/news/2015/09/15/jade-helm-15-ends-tuesday/72319886/
http://www.kvue.com/story/news/2015/09/15/jade-helm-15-ends-tuesday/72319886/
BASTROP, Texas -- Despite wild conspiracy theories, the Jade Helm 15 military exercise has come and gone without many people around the country even noticing.
(0)
(0)
LCDR (Join to see)
Although it is funny they are still saying Abbott deployed the guard as some sort of protection. He deployed the guard because they had extra money in the state budget and it was a good training opportunity. The Texas State Guard would never fight against the regular army, many of them have augmented into the regular army and deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google